Have given this a thorough review, both the final proposal, and its development during the draft phases on the list, etc.
Unfortunately I have to give the final proposal as it stands a strong -1. While I appreciate the future benefits of more generic existential types, the final proposal introduces syntax that is flat-out confusing and inconsistent with the rest of Swift 3. In Swift, the & operator is not used for composition, it serves only as the “Bitwise AND" operator for integer operations. OptionSetType gives a good example, where Swift has actively abandoned & for composition. Previously code was in an Obj-C style, e.g. NSOptionBox & NSOptionCarton but now uses “,” for composition within an array context: [.box, .carton] For this reason, I find that the pattern `<…, …, …>` is still a more Swift-y type composition syntax than the proposal. Scott _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
