Vladimir, please follow the link for the previous discussion. There are
several reasons outlined by core team members why they felt this was not a
bug, so it is definitely not the case that there are no opinions to that
effect. It was a very thorough conversation on the topic, and I’m not sure
what further statement you’d want from them.
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 09:12 Vladimir.S via swift-evolution <
> FWIW, I can't agree that this particular subject leads to huge
> about all the access modifiers. It is just about 'private extension'
> not more. And it seems like there no(?) opinions that current situation
> with private
> extension has any sense. It really looks like a bug.
> So, I'd like to ask, if it is possible, some note about the subject from
> core team. I
> hope they can revisit their decision to not even discuss *this particular*
> case with private extension.
> On 10.08.2017 16:28, Tino Heth via swift-evolution wrote:
> >> I agree, but after having originally raised the issue, members of the
> core team
> >> clearly disagreed. Therefore, it's clear that this is going to have to
> go through
> >> Swift Evolution or not be changed at all. And I also agree with the
> notion that
> >> further discussions of access modifiers, which will most certainly lead
> to a rehash
> >> of the whole sordid past, is unhealthy.
> > I guess that is the price to pay for stability… I personally am quite
> sad that Swift
> > reached that phase already.
> > But who knows — maybe after some years of collecting legacy, this might
> be discussed
> > again in a cleanup release of Swift.
> > Still, I think the current situation is a pity, as everyone seems to
> agree that we
> > ended up with a flawed solution for access control :-(
> > _______________________________________________
> > swift-evolution mailing list
> > firstname.lastname@example.org
> > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
> swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution mailing list