On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution < [email protected]> wrote:
> The design, specifically, is that a “private” member declared within a > type “X” or an extension thereof would be accessible from: > > * An extension of “X” in the same file > * The definition of “X”, if it occurs in the same file > * A nested type (or extension thereof) of one of the above that occurs in > the same file > Strongly +1, and I fully agree with David Hart draft. As an app developer that works with Swift everyday, this will fix most of my pain-points with scoped access. It will not only ease a very popular use of extensions, but when asking a new developer this is the default that makes more sense. Being selfish, with this proposal, you could even delete fileprivate, I would never use it or recommend it. If you want a type private to a file, enclose it under other type. -- Víctor Pimentel
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
