Hi Brent, > On 6 Apr 2017, at 09:10, Brent Royal-Gordon <[email protected]> wrote: > > So I'm not sure why you're invoking Objective-C to argue that we need a > type-based private.
I’m not trying to invoke the ghost of Apple-languages past, seriously :) I was outlining a use-case of something that I could do under Objective-C (and used regularly), and how type-based private (within the same submodule, sure) might be a better answer to that same problem. I’m sorry, I realise I’ve derailed my part of this conversation into a feature request — I’m trying to express that my experience over the past year is that only having private/fileprivate is making it more difficult to maintain some of the larger apps that I work on (the file lengths are getting quite long for common scenarios I could handle more gracefully in the past). Reading that after Swift 4, this will never change has also made me seriously uncomfortable given how much conflicted conversation has occurred on this topic. To me, it sounds like there is a need to address some of the intermediary access levels before this gets locked down permanently, but I’m also just an app developer - I don’t have a rounded Comp Sci understanding of many of the topics being discussed. I’ve had my (rambling, slightly grammatically incorrect) say now, thanks for listening. -t ---------- Tony Arnold +61 411 268 532 http://thecocoabots.com/ ABN: 14831833541 _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
