Object Marked as Unavailable for a Platform still Shows Error due to Higher API Requirement Inside the Body

Using Swift
,
1

As an example, I'll be using a LazyVStrack, which is available for iOS 14.0, macOS 11.0, tvOS 14.0, and watchOS 7.0.

I want to create a view, that has the same API level, but is only exposed to iOS:

@available(iOS 14.0, *)
@available(macOS, unavailable)
@available(tvOS, unavailable)
@available(watchOS, unavailable)
struct SomeView: View {
    var body: some View {
        LazyVStack(content: {
            EmptyView()
        })
    }
}

When switching to macOS, even though SomeView is marked as unavailable, compiler still shows error: "'LazyVStack' is only available in macOS 11.0 or newer". Why is that?

One solution is changing the availability attribute to @available(macOS 11.0, *)@available(macOS, unavailable). I don't know if that's the way to go.

@available(iOS 14.0, *)
@available(macOS 11.0, *)@available(macOS, unavailable)
@available(tvOS 14.0, *)@available(tvOS, unavailable)
@available(watchOS 7.0, *)@available(watchOS, unavailable)
struct SomeView: View {
    var body: some View {
        LazyVStack(content: {
            EmptyView()
        })
    }
}

Another solution is wrapping the entire declaration/file under #if os(iOS), which defeats the purpose of the availability attributes. Plus, I can't go that way. I need it for a package, and want the object to still be visible, but not available.

#if os(iOS)

@available(iOS 14.0, *)
struct SomeView: View {
    var body: some View {
        LazyVStack(content: {
            EmptyView()
        })
    }
}

#endif

Yet another solution is wrapping bodies with conditional compilation flags. This is valid, but seems excessive.

@available(iOS 14.0, *)
@available(macOS, unavailable)
@available(tvOS, unavailable)
@available(watchOS, unavailable)
struct SomeView: View {
    var body: some View {
#if os(iOS)
        LazyVStack(content: {
            EmptyView()
        })
#endif
    }
}

Is this an intended behavior? If so, is there a better way of tackling this?