> On Apr 5, 2016, at 4:04 PM, Drew Crawford <d...@sealedabstract.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On Apr 5, 2016, at 12:06 PM, Douglas Gregor <dgre...@apple.com
>> <mailto:dgre...@apple.com>> wrote:
>>
>> I would not want this to be implicit behavior: it should be recorded in the
>> source with, e.g.,
>>
>> @availability(iOS: 9.3) import YourCustomFramework
>>
>> so that it is clear that the imported declarations are only available on iOS
>> 9.3 or newer.
>>
>> - Doug
>
> Would you promote using this syntax for the Apple frameworks as well?
> A major goal for me is syntax consistency between Apple's and third-party
> frameworks. That way the knowledge of how to use one transfers to the other,
> and we ensure people with fresh ideas about how to build frameworks are not
> burdened with educating application developers about "novel" import syntax.
Apple frameworks tend to have ail their various classes and other APIs
annotated with availability attributes, so I wouldn’t expect to need this
import syntax for any of those. Really, this syntax is a shorthand for “treat
the imported library as if the author had put this availability annotation on
all of its public APIs”. If your goal is consistency between Apple frameworks
and other frameworks, I don’t think this is the way to go.
- Doug
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
