> On May 20, 2016, at 11:39 AM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On May 20, 2016, at 7:24 AM, Matthew Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On May 20, 2016, at 1:11 AM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>> On May 18, 2016, at 1:55 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I may be wrong but I don't remember any other case of a keyword in >>>>> Swift composed of two or more words, so I believe these should be >>>>> exceptions. >>>> >>>> `typealias` and `associatedtype` are the main examples; there were huge >>>> catfights on swift-evolution about whether the latter should be >>>> `associatedtype`, `associatedType`, or `associated_type`. There are also a >>>> number of attributes like `@noescape` and `@discardableResult`, which >>>> aren't 100% consistent. >>> >>> Right, but the catfight had a clear outcome: >>> >>> 1) keywords are conjoined >>> 2) attributes are lower camel cased. >>> 3) attributes should use “non” not “no”. noescape should be nonescaping >>> (and thus no camel bump). >> >> Would you be in favor of a proposal that cleans all of this up at once and >> establishes this standard for all new features? I don't mind the change and >> think consistency is a good idea, I just think it doesn't make sense to keep >> doing these as one-off changes. > > I’d prefer one proposal to cover didset/willset and one to cover nonescaping > (and any other nofoo attributes left). They will raise different sorts of > discussion, even though they both seem obvious to me.
Before putting together a proposal, are there any other de-facto rules besides the three already listed that touch on naming keywords and attributes? (I suppose no snake case is a given) -- E _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
