on Thu May 26 2016, Patrick Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 27 May 2016, at 2:40 PM, Austin Zheng via swift-evolution >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Any of the NSObject subclass candidates may require their >> `description`s to be altered to meet the semantics, which may or may >> not be an acceptable breaking change. > > Do you think it might be worth changing `description` to be named > something else? Something more clear, less likely to conflict with > ‘real’ properties — ‘description’ doesn’t seem to portray something > that is value-preserving. What is the reason for calling it > ‘description’? The main reason was backward compatibility with Cocoa, which already has a “description” property. > Especially if NSObject subclasses won’t fit, then why not have a > different method that can be strictly value preserving? (Then > `description` can stay being an NSObject thing.) -- Dave _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
