Consider the follow class (equally applicable to a struct, as well) in a module:
public class Foo {
public func bar() {
// method body
}
}
Note, it does not have an explicit initializer; this example doesn't need any special initialization. This class would be exposed to other modules because it is marked public
. However, when code outside the module attempts to initialize it, the compiler complains:
let foo = Foo() // 'Foo' initializer is inaccessible due to 'internal' protection level
In order to satisfy the compiler, I have to define an explicit empty initializer marked public
:
public class Foo {
public init() {
// This initializer intentionally left empty
}
public func bar() {
// do something useful
}
}
Why, if the class is explicitly public
, do I need to explicitly define a public initializer? Shouldn't it implicitly have a public initializer?
There is a related question here, pertaining to unit testing, but I find it doesn't really get at the core of the design philosophy of what I find to be a surprising issue.
Marking a class public does not necessarily imply that the developer wants the class to be initialized publicly. For example, I often write base classes that exist solely for me to be able to subclass them. I give these superclasses
internal
initializers so that their subclasses can access them, but those in the outside world shouldn't be using them directly. For example,Operation
inFoundation
has no accessible initializers, yet the class is public. It is simply meant to be subclassed. This is considered an abstract class in Objective-C.Since Swift doesn't contain explicit support for abstract classes, the act of making a class public but without public initializers basically serves as an abstract class (except each function must still have a default definition, either in the class itself or some protocol extension).
With this in mind, here are some Swift rules:
private
, all variables, inits, and functions will default toprivate
.internal
(which is default),public
, oropen
, all variables, inits, and functions will default tointernal
.public
in Objective-C are imported into Swift asopen
, due to there being no such distinction in Objective-C.That second one is the one you are running into. The default init is picking up the default
internal
because the last thing Swift wants to do is expose your init as public API unless it is explicitly instructed to do so.Note: In my tests (at least in the playground), it seems that with the introduction of
fileprivate
:private
orfileprivate
, it seems that class members default tofileprivate
unless explicitly annotatedprivate
.