> On Apr 20, 2016, at 10:16 AM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>       * What is your evaluation of the proposal?

+1 — yes, please!

>       * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change 
> to Swift?

Yes, this is a big cleanup of mental overhead when accessing class/static 
properties and functions that are related to the instance. This avoids the need 
to confirm, each time you read it, that the name of the receiver is the same as 
the name of the containing class/struct/whatever, as well as avoiding subtle 
bugs when refactoring code.

>       * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?

Yes, this helps avoid bugs, and shows clear intent. The name of `Self` shows 
the clear relationship between that and `self` where `dynamicType` does not.
>       * If you have you used other languages or libraries with a similar 
> feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?

No, but I’ve certainly been annoyed by its lack in other languages…

>       * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick 
> reading, or an in-depth study?

A close reading of the proposal and associated threads.

-tim

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

Reply via email to