> On May 20, 2016, at 10:41 AM, Erica Sadun <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> >>>> 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)
I think that these are the relevant rules. As I mentioned upthread, .dynamicType is broken for a different reason, and thus leads to a different solution (it should be a global function in the stdlib, not a propery). -Chris _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
