> On May 4, 2016, at 09:18, Joe Groff via swift-evolution 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On May 3, 2016, at 9:39 PM, Andrew Trick via swift-evolution 
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On May 3, 2016, at 8:56 PM, Chris Lattner <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello Swift community,
>>> 
>>> The review of "SE-0076: Add overrides taking an UnsafePointer source to 
>>> non-destructive copying methods on UnsafeMutablePointer" begins now and 
>>> runs through May 9. The proposal is available here:
>>> 
>>>     
>>> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0076-copying-to-unsafe-mutable-pointer-with-unsafe-pointer-source.md
>>> 
>>>     * What is your evaluation of the proposal?
>> 
>> The new methods are needed, but they don’t need to be overloads. I have no 
>> idea why the argument type was originally declared Mutable.
>> 
>> func assignBackwardFrom(source: UnsafePointer<Pointee>, count: Int
>> )
>> 
>> func assignFrom(source: UnsafePointer<Pointee>, count: Int
>> )
>> 
>> func initializeFrom(source: UnsafePointer<Pointee>, count: Int)
>> 
>> FWIW: I made precisely this change a while back on an experimental branch 
>> while experimenting with UnsafePointer conversion. I don’t see a problem 
>> with it.
>> 
>> Implicit argument conversion from UnsafeMutablePointer<Pointee> to 
>> UnsafePointer<Pointee> is normal and extremely obvious.
> 
> Yeah, Andy's approach seems cleaner than overloading.

:-( …but it’s an implicit conversion. Which we’re trying to expunge from the 
language. (Sort of.)

Jordan

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

Reply via email to