> * What is your evaluation of the proposal? +1. Looks much better than the previous version and makes a lot of sense to me.
A quick clarification question (I didn’t find any mention of this in the proposal, but I might have missed it): what happens if a class is declared open, but does not contain any open member declarations? Is this legal? > * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change > to Swift? Most likely > * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift? Yes > * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift? A quick reading. I was also following the previous discussion. > On 16 Jul 2016, at 07:52, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello Swift community, > > The second review of "SE-0117: Default classes to be non-subclassable > publicly" begins now and runs through July 22. The proposal is available here: > > > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0117-non-public-subclassable-by-default.md > > * What is your evaluation of the proposal? > * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change > to Swift? > * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift? > * If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar feature, > how do you feel that this proposal compares to those? > * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick > reading, or an in-depth study? > > More information about the Swift evolution process is available at > > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md > > Thank you, > > -Chris Lattner > Review Manager > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
