Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0172: One-sided Ranges

Most of the proposal looks fine to me. A welcome feature. Eager to see anyone's ideas for further extension to the range DSL—perhaps this will spark people's imaginations http://matt.might.net/articles/parsing-with-derivatives/ My only comment is concern over leaving out ..< It's not the prettiest

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0172: One-sided Ranges

I would add that I expect variadic generics to be used less often than one-sided ranges, and also to be a more complex and advanced feature. Both of these suggest that one-sided ranges deserve the simpler, friendlier syntax. -- Brent Royal-Gordon Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 20, 2017, at 4:38

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0172: One-sided Ranges

> On Apr 20, 2017, at 6:36 AM, Matt Whiteside wrote: > > I do like this proposed one-sided range syntax, but a while back it was > pointed out that it might conflict with a candidate syntax for variadic > generics. Has anything changed there? It does conflict with the straw man syntax descri

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0172: One-sided Ranges

I do like this proposed one-sided range syntax, but a while back it was pointed out that it might conflict with a candidate syntax for variadic generics. Has anything changed there? -Matt > On Apr 17, 2017, at 21:40, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution > wrote: > > Hello Swift community, >

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0172: One-sided Ranges

> • What is your evaluation of the proposal? +0.75 "RangeExpression" is an unexpected name. I was expecting "RangeProtocol", as in IteratorProtocol and LazySequenceProtocol. We need a consistent suffix for protocols that can't be named in -able, -ible, or named with a simple noun becaus

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0172: One-sided Ranges

> > >- What is your evaluation of the proposal? > > Strong +1, especially for the unary operators. They make code clear, concise, and elegant. Pattern matching against one-sided ranges looks great, and being able to use postfix “...” to create a sequence is niche but nifty. > >- Is the p

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0172: One-sided Ranges

> On Apr 17, 2017, at 10:40 PM, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution > wrote: > > > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0172-one-sided-ranges.md > > > What is your evaluation of

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0172: One-sided Ranges

> On 18 Apr 2017, at 05:40, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution > wrote: > > What is your evaluation of the proposal? I like the principle of the proposal, but I have some concerns regarding the operators. In particular I don't like that it relies on prefix/postfix versions of the range operat

[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0172: One-sided Ranges

Hello Swift community, The review of SE-0172 "One-sided Ranges" begins now and runs through April 23, 2017. The proposal is available here: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0172-one-sided-ranges.md Reviews are an important part of the Swift evolution process. All re