On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Max Moiseev <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Xiaodi, > > Q2: I do not understand the comment explaining signBitIndex. I thought I > understood what it does from the name, but the comment says it's not the > right name. So what is signBitIndex? > > The name is good but the way it is implemented in the prototype currently > is NOT what the name suggests. This is the point of the comment. I plan to > revisit the prototype and either make it behave the way it’s called, or > find a better name for what it currently does. > > Ask: You've got bitWidth and nthWord. Any way you could expose > __builtin_popcount()? Pretty please? > > I don’t mind adding it to the concrete types, similar to > `countLeadingZeros` (see > https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/test/Prototypes/Integers.swift.gyb#L855). > Do you think it should be a protocol requirement instead? > You're right, probably best belongs on concrete types. > > > Max > > > On Jun 22, 2016, at 6:13 PM, Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution < > [email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 7:52 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello Swift community, >> >> The review of "SE-0104: Protocol-oriented integers" begins now and runs >> through June 27. The proposal is available here: >> >> >> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0104-improved-integers.md >> >> Reviews are an important part of the Swift evolution process. All reviews >> should be sent to the swift-evolution mailing list at >> >> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >> >> or, if you would like to keep your feedback private, directly to the >> review manager. >> >> What goes into a review? >> >> The goal of the review process is to improve the proposal under review >> through constructive criticism and contribute to the direction of Swift. >> When writing your review, here are some questions you might want to answer >> in your review: >> >> * What is your evaluation of the proposal? >> > > This is excellent, and a huge improvement. Two questions and one ask: > > Q1: With the adoption of this proposal, will FloatingPoint conform to > Arithmetic? > Q2: I do not understand the comment explaining signBitIndex. I thought I > understood what it does from the name, but the comment says it's not the > right name. So what is signBitIndex? > Ask: You've got bitWidth and nthWord. Any way you could expose > __builtin_popcount()? Pretty please? > > >> * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a >> change to Swift? >> > > Yes, the current tangle of protocols is not exactly fun to work with for > generics. > > >> * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of >> Swift? >> > > Yes. > > >> * If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar >> feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those? >> > > Not applicable, I think. > > >> * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a >> quick reading, or an in-depth study? >> > > Read the proposal, worked with the existing protocols, thought carefully > about numbers in the context of the FloatingPoint discussion. > > >> More information about the Swift evolution process is available at >> >> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md >> >> Thank you, >> >> -Chris Lattner >> Review Manager >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
