I have to say that — while the concerns of the others are certainly valid, especially with regards to namespacing — I do like this idea, especially how it unifies access control of lexical scopes with that of types and friends.
-Thorsten > Am 14.04.2017 um 22:58 schrieb Erica Sadun via swift-evolution > <[email protected]>: > > Pull request: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/pull/681 > <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/pull/681> > > Under the assumption that SE-0169 is adopted, Jeffrey B and I have been > brainstorming about what a follow-on might look like. We want to address > concerns that remain post-0169. Although this proposal is primarily additive, > we feel it might just squeak in under Swift 4's gate as it targets > potentially harmful language issues. > > We appreciate your feedback about the substance of the proposal. At this > time, we're not looking for bikeshedding on design details. We will welcome > that once the question of whether the proposal is sufficiently substantive is > settled. > > Given the extremely limited timeline and the high volume of list traffic, > we're looking for specific concerns (or benefits) you see in this pitch > instead of a flurry of "+1" and "-1" responses . Our primary question regards > whether this is a suitable approach (it is strongly influenced by SE-0077) > and flexible enough to cover at least some outstanding concerns raised in > list threads over the past weeks. > > Thank you in advance for your feedback, > > -- Erica > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
