>       • Because Swift is unable to express conditional protocol conformances, 
> implementing this change has required us to create a great deal of complexity 
> in the standard library API. Aside from the two excess “Countable” range 
> types, there are new overloads for slicing and twelve distinct slice types 
> that capture all the combinations of traversal, mutability, and 
> range-replaceability. While these costs are probably temporary, they are very 
> real in the meantime.

Is there a migration strategy possible for when we do support conditional 
conformances? Would typealiasing the existing names to refinements of a more 
general Slice<T> type be sufficient?

-Joe
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Reply via email to