Slava Pestov a7e51721ce Sema: Fix minor inconsistencies with access control diagnostics ...

The various 'isExplicit' checks were wrong -- they should apply
to protocol requirements only, not protocol extension members.

Also, we weren't performing this check for type aliases in
protocols, so you would get a misleading diagnostic telling you
the type alias must be declared private/internal, when in fact
type aliases in protocols cannot have their own access control.

Finally, the "should be declared <X>" diagnostics (the
!isExplicit case) need to state the most visible access level
that will work, and in a few cases we would say private instead
of fileprivate here.

2018-06-15 13:23:58 -07:00

2.3 KiB

Raw Blame History

View Raw