Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0052: Change IteratorType post-nil guarantee

2016-05-03 Thread Patrick Pijnappel via swift-evolution
> > However, if there really is a 25% speedup on UTF-8 decoding for ASCII > input, that's a pretty significant point in favor of the change. I saw the > gist that was used to come up with this 25% number. But I do have to ask, > does the 25% increase still hold when talking about String.UTF8View, o

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0052: Change IteratorType post-nil guarantee

2016-05-02 Thread Kevin Ballard via swift-evolution
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016, at 11:12 AM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution wrote: > Hello Swift community, > > The review of "SE-0052: Change IteratorType post-nil guarantee" begins now > and runs through May 3. The proposal is available here: > > > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0052: Change IteratorType post-nil guarantee

2016-05-02 Thread Max Moiseev via swift-evolution
Hi all, We discussed the proposal with the members of the standard library team and we tend to +1 it (or +3 if you like). It does not introduce any new costs to the implementations currently available in the standard library, and even in the case of `TakeWhileIterator` the extra branches are l

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0052: Change IteratorType post-nil guarantee

2016-05-02 Thread Michael Peternell via swift-evolution
comments below. > Am 28.04.2016 um 20:12 schrieb Chris Lattner via swift-evolution > : > > Hello Swift community, > > The review of "SE-0052: Change IteratorType post-nil guarantee" begins now > and runs through May 3. The proposal is available here: > > > https://github.com/apple/swif

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0052: Change IteratorType post-nil guarantee

2016-05-01 Thread Patrick Pijnappel via swift-evolution
Thanks for the feedback! Some comments: 1. *Obscurity argument*: Both the existing precondition, and the proposed > convention are non-enforceable, non-testable, not well-known enough, and > generally too weak to be efficient in any way. People don't write custom > iterators often enough, and I do

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0052: Change IteratorType post-nil guarantee

2016-04-29 Thread Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution
> * What is your evaluation of the proposal? I think it's a good idea. This is a particularly sharp edge in the standard library: people have a completely reasonable expectation about `next()`'s behavior which is usually, but not always, borne out. And the vast majority of iterators can p

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0052: Change IteratorType post-nil guarantee

2016-04-29 Thread Gwendal Roué via swift-evolution
> Le 29 avr. 2016 à 08:18, Gwendal Roué a écrit : > >> The review of "SE-0052: Change IteratorType post-nil guarantee" begins now >> and runs through May 3. The proposal is available here: >> >> >> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0052-iterator-post-nil-guar

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0052: Change IteratorType post-nil guarantee

2016-04-28 Thread Gwendal Roué via swift-evolution
> The review of "SE-0052: Change IteratorType post-nil guarantee" begins now > and runs through May 3. The proposal is available here: > > > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0052-iterator-post-nil-guarantee.md • What is your evaluation of the proposal? I'm

[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0052: Change IteratorType post-nil guarantee

2016-04-28 Thread Chris Lattner via swift-evolution
Hello Swift community, The review of "SE-0052: Change IteratorType post-nil guarantee" begins now and runs through May 3. The proposal is available here: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0052-iterator-post-nil-guarantee.md Reviews are an important part of