on Mon Jun 27 2016, David Sweeris <davesweeris-AT-mac.com> wrote:
>> On Jun 27, 2016, at 13:13, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> There's an exception to everything. In this case, protocols used to
>> interface with the language at the lowest levels may be purely about
>> syntax.
>
> Should we use a different word to declare such protocols?
I don't think so.
> syntax IntegerLiteral { // where “syntax” is just the lowercase
> spelling of whatever we end up calling the namespace
> // everything from `IntegerLiteralConvertible` goes here
> }
>
> It would certainly help create the mental distinction between these
> “syntactic” protocols and "normal” protocols.
I doubt this distinction is worth the language complexity. Expressing
it in the library via the “Syntax.” qualification does the same thing
without any compiler changes.
--
Dave
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
