> Protocol requirements with default (no-op) implementations already satisfy > that design goal, no?
Chris, as we've discussed in a thread that I think got forked from this one: Yes, they do technically, but it would be nice to both: 1) make it an obvious documented part of the signature, possibly including the default return value 2) possibly make it less verbose by getting rid of the explicitly spelled out protocol extension A.
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
