> On Aug 11, 2017, at 19:21, John McCall <rjmcc...@apple.com> wrote: > >> On Aug 11, 2017, at 7:05 PM, David Zarzycki via swift-dev >> <swift-dev@swift.org> wrote: >> Hi Slava, >> >> Thanks. I’m not planning on seeking them out. I just want to minimize future >> merge conflicts with an experimental branch I’m working on. The visitor >> pattern helps people like me by minimizing the number of boilerplate updates >> a person needs to do after adding a new type to the type system. > > Unless you’re splitting an existing type, most of the boilerplate updates are > intentional — we want people to think about every case when doing the update.
I understand. Rather than discuss this abstractly, let’s consider a concrete example: Type::transformRec() in lib/AST/Type.cpp seems like a clear candidate that could and should switch to the visitor pattern because both NominalType and ReferenceStorageType are being handled abstractly. To what extent to you agree or disagree? Dave _______________________________________________ swift-dev mailing list swift-dev@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
