It's like "protected" access, in Java's terms. Subclasses can't access the default members in Java. That is why it is so rarely used. It was oddly restrictive, and didn't seem like it made much sense in most cases. I don't find this as a bad decision, in Swift. Since you don't normally want to expose the internals of your classes, this was a good choice.
Comments
It's like "protected" access, in Java's terms. Subclasses can't access the default members in Java. That is why it is so rarely used. It was oddly restrictive, and didn't seem like it made much sense in most cases. I don't find this as a bad decision, in Swift. Since you don't normally want to expose the internals of your classes, this was a good choice.
http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/javaOO/accesscon...
I think you might have gotten it wrong?
I think it (Swift's internal/default) is more like "package-private" in Java.
It looks almost exactly like C#'s internal:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms173121.aspx
ChrisLattner talks about the java in this recent post if you have access to the apple dev site.
https://devforums.apple.com/message/1010693#1010693 …