Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

On 06.07.2016 0:17, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution wrote: I'm not opposed to “By” if many more people think it's clearer. FWIW, for me "By" is *much* more clearer. ___ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

> On Jul 5, 2016, at 5:12 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote: > > > on Tue Jul 05 2016, Matthew Johnson wrote: > >>> On Jul 5, 2016, at 4:17 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> on Tue Jul 05 2016, Jordan Rose >>

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

on Tue Jul 05 2016, Matthew Johnson wrote: >> On Jul 5, 2016, at 4:17 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution >> wrote: >> >> >> on Tue Jul 05 2016, Jordan Rose > > wrote: >> > >>> [Proposal: >>>

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

> On Jul 5, 2016, at 3:17 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote: > > > on Tue Jul 05 2016, Jordan Rose > wrote: > >> [Proposal: >> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0115-literal-syntax-protocols.md >> >>

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

> On Jul 5, 2016, at 4:17 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution > wrote: > > > on Tue Jul 05 2016, Jordan Rose > wrote: > >> [Proposal: >> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0115-literal-syntax-protocols.md >> >>

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

on Tue Jul 05 2016, Jordan Rose wrote: > [Proposal: > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0115-literal-syntax-protocols.md > > ] > >> On Jul 3, 2016, at 9:52, David

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

[Proposal: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0115-literal-syntax-protocols.md ] > On Jul 3, 2016, at 9:52, David Sweeris via swift-evolution >

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

How about Syntax.IntegerLiteralDestination as a name? That way just as, for example, CustomStringConvertible can be read to mean “This type can be converted to a string in a custom manner”, we would have Syntax.IntegerLiteralDestination meaning “This type can be the destination for a literal

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

> On Jul 2, 2016, at 23:16, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution > wrote: > > Change it to "Syntax.ExpressibleByIntegerLiteral" and I'd be onboard but > I don't think it would pass the DaveTest despite it being only 2 characters > longer.[1] Yeah, I agree with "By"

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

> On 3 Jul 2016, at 3:53 AM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution > wrote: > > > on Sat Jul 02 2016, Riley Testut > wrote: > >> (My bad, accidentally hit send too early). >> >> That, or we could keep either the Convert or Express

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

> On Jul 2, 2016, at 2:39 PM, Riley Testut via swift-evolution > wrote: > >> When naming, we need to learn to stop treating the comfortable ring of >> familiar word patterns as an arbiter of success. > > I’m not sure I agree with this statement. I would argue we

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

on Sat Jul 02 2016, Riley Testut wrote: >> When naming, we need to learn to stop treating the comfortable ring of >> familiar word patterns as an arbiter of success. > > I’m not sure I agree with this statement. I would argue we should most > certainly aim to keep a

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

> When naming, we need to learn to stop treating the comfortable ring of > familiar word patterns as an arbiter of success. I’m not sure I agree with this statement. I would argue we should most certainly aim to keep a consistent feel across our naming conventions, and furthermore, I think

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

on Sat Jul 02 2016, Riley Testut wrote: > (My bad, accidentally hit send too early). > > That, or we could keep either the Convert or Express forms with > "IntegerLiteralConverting" or "IntegerLiteralExpressing". And if we > decide "express" really is the best word to describe what happens, I

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution writes: > > But as some of them noted in the discussion, low-level protocols that > > interact with language syntax can focus on syntax entirely. I've not > > seen this point supported by other team members, though. > > > > Personally, I

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution writes: > on Sat Jul 02 2016, Anton Zhilin swift.org> wrote: > > > -1 from me. I suggest to wait until we get generic protocols > > in Swift 4, then we can use the following: > > > > protocol From { > > init(_ from: T) > > } > > > >

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

To be honest, that’s why I suggested the idea of Literal.IntegerProtocol with the Protocol suffix. If I’d read something like this extension Array : Literal.ArrayProtocol I won’t be confused what that protocol will do, because it doesn’t tell me the full behavior from its name. ErrorProtocol

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

(My bad, accidentally hit send too early). That, or we could keep either the Convert or Express forms with "IntegerLiteralConverting" or "IntegerLiteralExpressing". And if we decide "express" really is the best word to describe what happens, I personally prefer "IntegerLiteralExpressing" to

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

on Sat Jul 02 2016, Anton Zhilin wrote: > Matthew Johnson via swift-evolution writes: > >> >>> protocol From { >> >>> init(_ from: T) >> >>> } >> >> >> > With From definition given above, I would define > IntLiteralConvertible === >> > From,

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

I kinda agree that these names still aren't the best. FWIW, I much preferred the originals, even if they could be misleading. What if we changed the names to be verbs instead of adjectives? Something like "IntegerLiteralTransforming"? > On Jul 2, 2016, at 10:35 AM, Dave Abrahams via

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

on Sat Jul 02 2016, Anton Zhilin wrote: > -1 from me. I suggest to wait until we get generic protocols > in Swift 4, then we can use the following: > > protocol From { > init(_ from: T) > } > > And deprecate all the weird Convertibles. Even if we could do that,

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

Matthew Johnson via swift-evolution writes: > >>> protocol From { > >>> init(_ from: T) > >>> } > >> > > With From definition given above, I would define IntLiteralConvertible === > > From, BoolLiteralConvertible === From, etc. That means, if you > > conform to From

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

Sent from my iPad On Jul 2, 2016, at 9:10 AM, Anton Zhilin via swift-evolution wrote: >>> Anton Zhilin via swift-evolution writes: >>> -1 from me. I suggest to wait until we get generic protocols >>> in Swift 4, then we can use the following:

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

> >Anton Zhilin via swift-evolution writes: > > -1 from me. I suggest to wait until we get generic protocols > > in Swift 4, then we can use the following: > > > > protocol From { > >init(_ from: T) > > } > > I'm not sure this feature would be relevant in the case of

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

Matthew Johnson via swift-evolution writes: > Sent from my iPad > > > On Jul 2, 2016, at 6:11 AM, Anton Zhilin via swift-evolution swift.org> wrote: > > > > -1 from me. I suggest to wait until we get generic protocols > > in Swift 4, then we can use the following: > > >

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

Sent from my iPad > On Jul 2, 2016, at 6:11 AM, Anton Zhilin via swift-evolution > wrote: > > -1 from me. I suggest to wait until we get generic protocols > in Swift 4, then we can use the following: > > protocol From { >init(_ from: T) > } This is extremely

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

-1 from me. I suggest to wait until we get generic protocols in Swift 4, then we can use the following: protocol From { init(_ from: T) } And deprecate all the weird Convertibles. ___ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

+0.5 - generally in favor, but I'm also leaning towards the "namespaced" alternative. > On Jul 2, 2016, at 1:07 AM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution > wrote: > > Hello Swift community, > > The review of "SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols" begins now and

[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

Hello Swift community, The review of "SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols" begins now and runs through July 7. The proposal is available here: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0115-literal-syntax-protocols.md Reviews are an important part of the