> On Aug 1, 2017, at 10:49 AM, Michael Gottesman <mgottes...@apple.com> wrote: > > I was reading https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/11098 and it brought my > mind back to a strawman discussion that Roman and I had some time ago. > Namely, in some cases, we want the functionality of a covered switch, but it > would be wasteful to write out all of the cases and fatal error due to the > size of the enum (consider ValueKind which I am pretty sure has > 100+ case). > So we don't write the covered switch, do use a default case, and, of course > when the switch needs to be updated, forgot to update the switch yielding > bugs. > > Keep in mind I am not 100% sure what the right solution to this is or even if > we /should/ solve this solution. But since it is easy for bugs to result from > this, a solution to this problem would improve the quality of the compiler. > The key thing to notice here is that we actually do not intrinsically care > about all of the cases being covered by a switch but rather that the user is > notified whenever an enum is changed that a specific switch needs to be > re-visited and or updated. > > This made me wonder I wonder if we could create some sort of tooling with > such an affect. My simple strawman would be to mark a switch as being > associated with a specific enum/its cases at a specific revision. > > Your thoughts? > Michael
An editor cross-reference feature: show me all switches on this type. -Andy _______________________________________________ swift-dev mailing list swift-dev@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
