+1; first-class affordances to make dimensional analysis possible would be incredibly useful.
Austin > On Dec 29, 2015, at 12:11 AM, Howard Lovatt via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 for the ability to unit check expressions. It is harder to do than it > sounds because there are many equivalent units, for example force N = mass kg > * acceleration m/s^2. Therefore N, kg m/s^2, m/s^2 kg, etc. are all equal. > > Sent from my iPad > >> On 28 Dec 2015, at 9:33 AM, Greg Titus via swift-evolution >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> On Dec 27, 2015, at 2:56 AM, Tino Heth <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> There’s some unfortunate extra boilerplate here, which could be better >>>> handled with newtype support in the language, but when compiled with >>>> optimizations the resulting code is nearly identical to using plain Ints. >>> >>> Cool — have you checked the generated assembler for this conclusion? But I >>> guess there is some knowledge on how to build an optimizing compiler in the >>> core team ;-), so I'd expect little to no penalty (I guess the memory >>> footprint of plain Ints is still better). >> >> Yes, I have, and actually, the memory footprint is no different! These are >> value-types that are exactly word-sized, and so get passed around in >> registers and stored inline in larger structs. >> >> - Greg >> _______________________________________________ >> swift-evolution mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
