Regards
LM
(From mobile)
> On Jun 22, 2016, at 8:04 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution
> wrote:
>
> Hello Swift community,
>
> The review of "SE-0095: Replace `protocol` syntax with `Any`"
> begins now and runs through June 27. The proposal is
On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
> Hello Swift community,
>
> The review of "SE-0095: Replace `protocol` syntax with
> `Any`" begins now and runs through June 27. The proposal is
> available here:
>
>
>
> The review of "SE-0095: Replace `protocol` syntax with `Any`"
> begins now and runs through June 27. The proposal is available here:
>
>
> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0095-any-as-existential.md
>
> * What is your evaluation of the
Not with this proposal, but this should be allowed at a later point.
This would work as a workaround.
protocol A { }
protocol B { }
typealias AB = A & B
struct Foo : AB { }
class SuperClass { }
class SubClass : SuperClass, AB { }
It’s up to the core team to decide if your mentioned behavior
Could this ampersand syntax be reused in protocol adoption too?
Idea:
protocol A { }
protocol B { }
struct Foo : A & B { }
class SuperClass { }
class SubClass : SuperClass, A & B { }
This would solve a problem: currently you cannot tell at a glance whether a
class is a) inheriting from a
Hello Swift community,
The review of "SE-0095: Replace `protocol` syntax with `Any`"
begins now and runs through June 27. The proposal is available here:
https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0095-any-as-existential.md
Reviews are an important