I like this. > On Jan 3, 2016, at 1:38 AM, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello Swift community, > > The review of "Replace `typealias` keyword with `associatedtype` for > associated type declarations” begins now and runs through Wednesday, January > 6th. The proposal is available here: > > > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0011-replace-typealias-associated.md > > <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0011-replace-typealias-associated.md> > > Reviews are an important part of the Swift evolution process. All reviews > should be sent to the swift-evolution mailing list at > > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution> > > or, if you would like to keep your feedback private, directly to the review > manager. > > What goes into a review? > > The goal of the review process is to improve the proposal under review > through constructive criticism and, eventually, determine the direction of > Swift. When writing your review, here are some questions you might want to > answer in your review: > > * What is your evaluation of the proposal?
It’s a good idea and improves the language. > * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change > to Swift? Yes, the existing situation is comprehensible (if you think like a language-implementer) but highly non-intuitive and generally sub-optimal for language users. > * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift? Yes; conservation-of-reserved-terms is valuable, but giving different things different names fits the feel much better here. > * If you have you used other languages or libraries with a similar > feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those? To the extent I’m aware of analogous situations in other languages, none of them actually seem to use distinct keywords, but they also don’t have the confusing situation Swift has vis-a-vis typealiases with concrete definitions (in protocols). > * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick > reading, or an in-depth study? Quick read, plus having been bit by issues the proposal addresses numerous times. > > More information about the Swift evolution process is available at > > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md > <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md> > > Cheers, > Doug Gregor > Review Manager > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
