> On Jun 28, 2016, at 9:05 PM, Erica Sadun <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 28, 2016, at 7:52 PM, Matthew Johnson <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 28, 2016, at 8:35 PM, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution
>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Jun 28, 2016, at 6:13 PM, Dave Abrahams <[email protected]
>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>>> Or we're clueless AND it's a bad name.
>>>>
>>>> It's possible, but until we have an objective rationale for why it's bad
>>>> (arguments that it seems to imply what turns out to be the actual
>>>> meaning of the protocol don't count!), *and* a better alternative, it's
>>>> sort of moot. If you don't like `Syntax.IntegerLiteral` or
>>>> `Syntax.IntegerLiteralExpressible` then I'm out of suggestions.
>>>>
>>>>> func f<T: IntegerPromotion>() -> T {
>>>>> return 42 // the answer to everything
>>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> Promotion means something very different; something that we actually
>>>> expect to incorporate into the language one day.
>>>
>>> Syntax.MarvinTheDepressedIntegerLiteral
>> You really have me laughing with some of these! Thanks Erica. :)
>
> A few more, with a slightly different approach that pushes the literal part
> towards the end of the name:
> Syntax.SupportsIntegerLiterals
> Syntax.AcceptsIntegerLiterals
> Syntax.IncludesIntegerLiterals
> Syntax.IncorporatesIntegerLiterals
If you want to pick out your favorites I’ll be happy to update the proposal to
include them in the alternatives section.
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
