on Thu Jun 16 2016, David Waite <david-AT-alkaline-solutions.com> wrote:
> I’ve always considered the term of art argument to be at least partially a > red herring. > > These methods are difficult because you don’t have guarantees of > non-mutability until you get to Collection - on Sequence, a dropFirst > method may mean that neither the original nor returned sequence can > address that item anymore. Names have to indicate that a Sequence may > or may not consume an item. > > It makes me wonder if we should evaluate doing something more > aggressive, such as eliminating the support of one-time/destructive > Sequences completely. That is something I've been considering, too. Another possibile approach, though I admit I don't really understand how this one plays out yet, would be to break the refinement relationship between Sequence and Collection. -- -Dave _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
