# Swift Evolution Proposal — Add typeprivate Access Level **URL:** \ **Category:** Discussion\ **Created:** [November 20, 2025, 7:36am UTC](https://forums.swift.org/t/swift-evolution-proposal-add-typeprivate-access-level/83320 "2025-11-20T07:36:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 3
**Author:** ![QuinceyMorris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/d26b3c/32.png) [@QuinceyMorris](https://forums.swift.org/u/QuinceyMorris)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2025, 8:14am UTC](https://forums.swift.org/t/swift-evolution-proposal-add-typeprivate-access-level/83320/3 "2025-11-20T08:14:54Z")
Welcome to the Swift forums! The problems that this would solve are well-known pain points in the language, and they have been discussed many times over the years (e.g. [Calling private methods from extensions in separate files](https://forums.swift.org/t/calling-private-methods-from-extensions-in-separate-files/54029)) but so far no consensus has been reached that would allow a proposal to move forward. To me, a big issue with a `typeprivate` like this is that the "owner" or originator of the type loses control of intended privacy within the type, due to the ability of other programmers to privately extend the type in other source code without limitation. In effect, therefore, `typeprivate` becomes something a lot like `internal`, which isn't really a solution. I recommend that you search the forums for some discussions on this subject, to get a feeling for how little agreement there is. If you can find a meaningfully different approach (or at least meaningfully different answers to the existing objections!), I'm sure the community would love to hear about that. 🙂 --- _[View the full topic](https://forums.swift.org/t/swift-evolution-proposal-add-typeprivate-access-level/83320)._