> On Jun 24, 2016, at 10:37 AM, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Really? I must have overlooked that some pitched that design. > It wasn’t pitched in its own thread. It came up in discussions about the previous proposal a couple different times. > Okay now that I think through this whole scenario, I like the underscore iff > there is a good name that will be present in the final version. > > When Swift 3 drops, I’ll write a proposal for nested protocols which will > refine your design (the original author went missing after pitching this > idea, and Joe Groff told me that this probably out of scope for Swift 3)! > Yes, the plan is to take advantage of any relevant features Swift gets in the future. This would allow removal of the underscore protocols. If Swift gets submodules or real namespaces I’m sure `Syntax` would become one of those as well. The good news is that all of this is considered implementation details that don’t affect user code so I don’t believe making these changes would require a proposal. > Your current design might become this in Swift 3.X and all protocols marked > with an underscore will disappear: > > public /* closed */ enum Syntax { > public protocol NilLiteral { ... } > public protocol BooleanLiteral { ... } > public protocol IntegerLiteral { ... } > public protocol FloatLiteral { ... } > public protocol UnicodeScalarLiteral { ... } > public protocol ExtendedGraphemeClusterLiteral { ... } > public protocol StringLiteralLiteral { ... } > public protocol StringInterplolationLiteral { ... } > public protocol ArrayrLiteral { ... } > public protocol DictionaryLiteral { ... } > } > > > > -- > Adrian Zubarev > Sent with Airmail > > Am 24. Juni 2016 um 17:25:45, Matthew Johnson ([email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>) schrieb: > >> The design in this proposal comes from the standard library team. The >> intent is for the use of underscore here to be consistent with other uses of >> underscore prefix in the standard library. I’m not sure why you think this >> is different than the rest... >> >> >>> On Jun 24, 2016, at 10:22 AM, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> I’m aware of that fact, but all types with underscore even in the stdlib >>> telling me to keep my hands of them, because something might happen to them. >>> >>> As an example we have _Strideable protocol which is visible by its name, >>> but its declaration isn’t visible at all: >>> // FIXME(ABI)(compiler limitation): Remove `_Strideable`. >>> // WORKAROUND rdar://25214598 <rdar://25214598> - should be: >>> // protocol Strideable : Comparable {...} >>> >>> % for Self in ['_Strideable', 'Strideable']: >>> From Stride.swift.gyb >>> <https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/63c36dff0a327874a5041d46335bde314bc108d8/stdlib/public/core/Stride.swift.gyb> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Adrian Zubarev >>> Sent with Airmail >>> >>> Am 24. Juni 2016 um 17:09:53, Matthew Johnson ([email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>) schrieb: >>> >>>> The underscore is used in the same way it is used elsewhere in the >>>> standard library. The protocols must be public because they need to be >>>> visible to user code in order for the design to work correctly. However, >>>> they are considered implementation details that users really shouldn’t >>>> know about. This pattern is well established in the standard library. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> swift-evolution mailing list >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >>> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
