> On Apr 28, 2016, at 6:27 PM, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Note that this cannot work when any enclosing type is generic, e.g.,
>
> class MyController<T> {
> protocol Delegate {
> // I’ve just created a parameterized protocol!
> }
> }
>
> Otherwise, I don’t see any issues with the proposal, and I like that it
> eliminates a large number of top-level names.
>
> - Doug
Is that a bad, or are you just pointing out that this proposal would implicitly
add parameterized protocols to Swift? I don’t think they’re *exactly* the same
as “naked” parameterized protocols, since you wouldn’t be able access a nested
protocol without specifying all the container type’s generic parameters, but
maybe that’s a difference that makes no difference.
- Dave Sweeris
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
