IIRC, "custom" was used because it's not just conforming types that are string convertible; it's that these types have a custom string conversion. I can appreciate how this is an important point to communicate. On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 14:16 Eric Habberstad via swift-evolution < [email protected]> wrote:
> > To the Swift community, > > May I put forth a couple of new names for the following protocol: > > > - CustomStringConvertible — rename as ‘Descriptive’ or as ‘Revealable’ > > > Two goals for Swift is clarity and joy in use of the language, so I > strongly feel that ‘Custom-‘ not be part of any new name here since it > contributes little except verbosity, and ‘-String-‘ should be dropped too > since ‘CustomStringConvertible’ has nothing to do with the String struct > proper. The protocol only consists of the *var description*, after all. > > Of course, the corollary would be ‘DebugDescriptive’ or ‘DebugRevealable’ > > I did consider ‘Describable’ as a name but to me ‘Descriptive’ looks and > sounds better and captures the essence of what CustomStringConvertible > really is. ‘Revealable’ as an alternate sounds, pardon the pun, almost as > descriptive and has a bit of a classier ring to it. > > This is a followup, albeit partial, to the final review of proposal > SE-0041 which noted that the community was quite positive about the > stated need to rename this and some other protocols, but just needs > agreement on new names. > > — Eric > _______________________________________________ > 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
