+1 from me too. (My vote takes into account the various alternatives were put on the table and weeded down thoughtfully to the one we're voting on.)
-- E > On Jan 3, 2016, at 5:57 AM, T.J. Usiyan via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 from me. It is a solid change that addresses an oddity in the language. > > On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 7:27 AM, plx via swift-evolution > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > I like this. > >> On Jan 3, 2016, at 1:38 AM, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution >> <[email protected] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution> > > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution> > > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
