> Existentials for protocols with Self and / or associated type requirements > would require bindings for Self and / or the associated type(s). At least > when you use a member that contains Self and / or an associated type in its > signature. So the previous example will always fail to compile.
Not true. Joe Groff: > This seems like it would be addressed just by allowing Factory to be used as > a dynamic type, with its Product type generalized to Any. We'll be set up to > support that with some runtime work to store associated types in protocol > witness tables (which is also necessary to fix cyclic conformances, one of > our Swift 3 goals). > Yeah, when generalizing a protocol type, we ought to be able to either > generalize the associated types to their upper bounds, for use cases like > yours, or constrain them to specific types, for the AnyGenerator<T> kind of > case. _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
