> Also "subclassable class" sounds a bit redundant. In other words, I think
> subclassable implies it is a class.
That's a good point:
There is no inherent reason that you can't inherit from a struct, and that
might be possible in a future version of swift.
"subclassable struct MyValue" doesn't read that bad, but depending on how much
emphasis is given to the difference of classes and structs, this could be
irritating.
But imho the naming is bad anyways:
Both keywords are completely irrelevant for "regular" developers, yet they are
directly linked to fundamental concepts of the language.
Removing "overridable" from a method has not the expected effect (you still can
override it), and the same is true for subclassable.
Something abstract (like "virtual") would be a little less confusing.
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
