when I put an

init

block under a property I can initialize it there. This doesn't seem to work anymore if this property has a setter. Is that correct?

I'm guessing it's because in the setter the backing field (with the initial value) is available. The

init

block will call the setter. So in the setter the field will already need to be initialized.

makes sense yea

yea or an own private backing property perhaps (if you wish to bypass the setter in the

init

)