> That’s why open is a success IMHO
I always appreciate when personal opinion is marked — I just want to point out
this could apply to two aspects here ("that's why" and "open is a success" ;-)
> I don’t think its worth arguing about renaming again. Yes, its technically a
> better option,
There's rarely complete agreement about anything, but exceptions aside: Is
there consensus about this?
If that's actually the case, I think we really should take a step back and
question ourselves:
This would mean Swift discards a compromise which was afaics widely accepted in
favour of something worse because… it is to much work and the "other languages"
would laugh about our fickleness?
And would keeping status quo be so much worse than status quo with new names?
I'm not sure about the longevity of the Swift 4 model of access control
(however it may look like), but afaik, we might have to live with it for a long
time — and many future users of Swift (without any legacy-knowledge) as well.
> but the Core Team will not consider it for the same reasons they rejected
> SE-0159. I’m under the impression that SE-0169 is the only solution we have.
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
