> On Jan 5, 2017, at 1:05 AM, Tino Heth <2...@gmx.de> wrote: > > Hi there, > >> I think it would be better if we permitted an implicit conversion between >> (T…) -> () and ([T]) -> () > There has been a proposal to replace the "…" with a "variadic"-annotation (on > arrays, or even on all types that can be expressed as arrays): > https://github.com/Haravikk/swift-evolution/blob/a13dc03d6a8c76b25a30710d70cbadc1eb31b3cd/proposals/nnnn-variadics-as-attribute.md > > <https://github.com/Haravikk/swift-evolution/blob/a13dc03d6a8c76b25a30710d70cbadc1eb31b3cd/proposals/nnnn-variadics-as-attribute.md> This sounds like a cosmetic proposal that doesn’t change semantics, so I don’t think it’s directly related to the change I’m proposing.
Slava > The idea to accept array literals wherever a set, array etc. is expected came > up in the discussion as well. > Interoperability with C has not been part of the debate, but besides that, > imho it should be possible to get rid of varargs completely. > > Imho the whole thread didn't receive the treatment it deserved because it > happened in a very busy timeframe, but I wanted to asked the original author > if he wants to continue working on the idea. > > Afaics, the issue you found would be directly affected by the change in > question, so I'm curious about your opinion on it. > > Best regards, > Tino > > >
_______________________________________________ swift-dev mailing list swift-dev@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
