on Mon Apr 25 2016, Xiaodi Wu <xiaodi.wu-AT-gmail.com> wrote: > Quick thought: > > Why are you reaching for the "form..." rule for the mutating methods when > there > are clear verb counterparts? > location: locate > successor: succeed
We're not using successor(i) anymore, as noted below, and furthermore c.succeed(&i) strongly implies the wrong meaning. I didn't consider using c. locate(...:&i ... ) primarily because I never thought of it and nobody suggested it IIRC, but I also don't see how it would work in a family with c.location(after: i) et al. Suggestions? > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > on Wed Apr 20 2016, Chris Lattner <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Apr 10, 2016, at 2:41 PM, Chris Lattner > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hello Swift community, > > > > The review of "A New Model for Collections and Indices" begins now and > runs > > through April 18th. The proposal is available here: > > > > > > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0065-collections-move-indices.md > > > > > Reviews are an important part of the Swift evolution process. All > reviews > > should be sent to the swift-evolution mailing list at: > > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > > or, if you would like to keep your feedback private, directly to the > review > > manager. > > > > A quick update: the core team met to discuss this. They agreed to accept > it with > > some naming-related revisions to the proposal (in response to community > > feedback). Dave is organizing this feedback, and I’ll send out the > formal > > announcement when that is ready. > > The final revisions are reflected in the latest version of the > proposal: > > > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0065-collections-move-indices.md > > Summary: > > * We decided to take Shawn Erickson's excellent suggestion > <http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.swift.evolution/14450> to > use “location” uniformly for index movement, so instead of > successor(i) and predecessor(i) we have location(after: i) and > location(before: i). > > * Since Brent Royal-Gordon pointed out > > <http://news.gmane.org/find-root.php?message_id=156D8FB1%2d1FD3%2d448E%2d8C70%2d6E7400629BC0%40architechies.com > > > that two of the three proposed Range protocols would likely disappear > in future updates, we took another look at all of them. Finding > `RangeProtocol` itself to be a very weak abstraction, we removed all > three from the proposal. > > For those interested in details, implementation work proceeds apace on > the swift-3-indexing-model branch at > > <https://github.com/apple/swift/tree/swift-3-indexing-model/stdlib/public/core > >. > > P.S. If anyone is interested in contributing, there are still plenty of > FIXMEs left for us to handle ;-) > > -- > Dave > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > -- Dave _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
