Sent from my iPad
> On May 31, 2016, at 7:10 PM, Chris Lattner <[email protected]> wrote: > > This is very close to my priority list. That said, I think that all of these > are out of scope for swift 3 sadly. Happy to hear these priorities look about right to you also. (I realized afterwards that I left off opening existentials which I would put around 5 or 6) BTW, generalized existentials is #2 for me if we include things that already have proposals as well. That going to be a game changer. I've already been assuming we won't see any major new generics features in Swift 3. > > After Swift 3, the priority list will be driven by what the standard library > needs to get its APIs realized in their ideal form (eg without any of the _ > protocol hacks). Conditional conformances certainly top the list, but we > will have to carefully and ruthlessly prioritize things in order to get to > ABI stability. Makes sense. > > -Chris > >> On May 31, 2016, at 2:16 PM, Matthew Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> On May 31, 2016, at 2:56 PM, Austin Zheng via swift-evolution >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> This is pretty much where my thinking about the topic has led me as well. >>> I'll resign this topic to pursue some other, hopefully more relevant work, >>> although anyone who wants to continue the discussion is welcome to. >> >> Seems reasonable to wait until we can at least evaluate the macro approach >> properly. >> >> Are you planning to continue work on generics? FWIW, my top priority list >> for items without proposals is roughly: >> >> 1. Conditional conformance >> (https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/docs/GenericsManifesto.md#conditional-conformances-) >> 2. Parameterized extensions >> (https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/docs/GenericsManifesto.md#parameterized-extensions) >> 3. Generic subscripts >> (https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/docs/GenericsManifesto.md#generic-subscripts) >> 4. Recursive protocol constraints >> (https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/docs/GenericsManifesto.md#nested-generics) >> 5. Nested generics >> (https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/docs/GenericsManifesto.md#nested-generics) >> 6. Default generic arguments >> (https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/docs/GenericsManifesto.md#default-generic-arguments) >> 7. Extensions of structural types >> (https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/docs/GenericsManifesto.md#extensions-of-structural-types) >> >> And this one seems like low hanging fruit: >> >> Default implementations in protocols >> (https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/docs/GenericsManifesto.md#default-implementations-in-protocols-) >> >> How does this compare to your priorities for generics? >> >>> >>>> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Chris Lattner <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On May 31, 2016, at 12:17 PM, L Mihalkovic via swift-evolution >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> well there is no macro system, and for the moment a clear statement from >>>>> chris that this is not on the table in the short term. the code in the >>>>> example looked like run-of-the-mill swift, except for the “…". so that >>>>> leaves us with swift looking code that would be executed by the compiler, >>>>> but with nothing particular to tell which parts to and which not. just a >>>>> thought. >>>> >>>> Lets be clear though: variadic generics are not in scope for Swift 3 >>>> either. >>>> >>>> I definitely don’t speak for the rest of the core team, nor have I >>>> discussed it with them… but IMO, this whole feature seems like a better >>>> fit for a macro system than it does to complicate the generics system. >>>> Unlike C++’s template system, our generics system inherently has runtime / >>>> dynamic dispatch properties, and I don’t think that shoehorning variadics >>>> into it is going to work out well. >>>> >>>> -Chris >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On May 31, 2016, at 7:59 PM, Austin Zheng <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> How so? I'm interested in anything that can get us away from having to >>>>>> generating code at compile-time. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 10:04 AM, L. Mihalkovic >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What's interesting about the code in the manifesto is that it looks >>>>>>> very much like "..." is a runtime construct, as opposed to trying the >>>>>>> get the compiler to do the heavy lifting. >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> swift-evolution mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> swift-evolution mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >>
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
