> On Dec 20, 2015, at 3:58 , Tino Heth via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> The main reason to use `associated` is because the feature is called an >> "associated type". If we're willing to rename the feature to "placeholder >> type", then `placeholder` would be a good keyword. > good point - maybe it's because I'm no native speaker, but for me "associated > type" is just a technical term with no obvious meaning.
Fair enough; "associated type" is a fairly vacuous term. I think the implication is that when you choose a model of the protocol, the concrete type, then these other types come along with it. But that's not immediately clear, so I don't think renaming the feature is out of the question. I don't like the name "placeholder" or "placeholder type" because that only describes how they're used in the protocol. When you're actually implementing a generic function, the generic parameter is a sort of placeholder, and the associated types are just as concrete as the conforming type itself. Jordan
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
