See the thread about stabilizing CI. The locked master while they worked out issues with the CI systems. Last I read it should be unlocked soon. On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 8:30 AM Brian Gesiak via swift-evolution < [email protected]> wrote:
> Apologies if this was announced elsewhere: is commit access to master > restricted? > > I noticed I couldn't merge some documentation improvements in > https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/3815, and just wanted to make sure > this was due to Swift 3 finalization. > > If commit access is restricted, is it safe to assume that restriction will > be lifted on or around July 29? > > > - Brian Gesiak > > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 7:15 AM, Anton Zhilin via swift-evolution < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> https://github.com/apple/swift/commit/c8c41b385c0312e562abe4952fa2d6794dec2e0f >> Is SE-0077 going to be implemented for Swift 3? >> >> >> https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/stdlib/internal/SwiftExperimental/SwiftExperimental.swift >> Does this code actually run? >> >> If so, I will add "implemented" to the proposal, plus I still haven't >> added latest naming changes. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ >> >> 2016-07-28 1:17 GMT+03:00 Tony Allevato via swift-evolution < >> [email protected]>: >> >>> I noticed that while SE-0091 appears to be implemented (from a cursory >>> glance at some of the affected types like Equatable and String), it looks >>> like the named methods are still part of the FloatingPoint protocol and >>> they still use global operators. >>> >>> Is anyone tracking the migration of that protocol (and possibly also the >>> new Integer protocols) to use the new operator technique? (I have to >>> apologize for not being able to update the proposal with another PR that >>> listed all those changes—my free time outside my day job has been >>> significantly reduced lately.) >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:38 PM Ted Kremenek via swift-evolution < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Dear friends, >>>> >>>> Today is July 27 — and the last planned day to take source-breaking >>>> changes for Swift 3. It has been an incredible ride to this point, so let's >>>> take stock of where we are. Here are the list of currently accepted — but >>>> not yet (fully) implemented — evolution proposals (this is drawn from the >>>> "accepted" but not marked "implemented" proposals from the >>>> swift-evolution <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution> repository): >>>> >>>> - SE-0025 - Scoped Access Level >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0025-scoped-access-level.md> >>>> - SE-0042 - Flattening the function type of unapplied method >>>> references >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0042-flatten-method-types.md> >>>> - SE-0045 - Add scan, prefix(while:), drop(while:), and iterate to >>>> the stdlib >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0045-scan-takewhile-dropwhile.md> >>>> - SE-0068 - Expanding Swift Self to class members and value types >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0068-universal-self.md> >>>> - SE-0075 - Adding a Build Configuration Import Test >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0075-import-test.md> >>>> - SE-0077 - Improved operator declarations >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0077-operator-precedence.md> >>>> - SE-0080 - Failable Numeric Conversion Initializers >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0080-failable-numeric-initializers.md> >>>> - SE-0081 - Move where clause to end of declaration >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0081-move-where-expression.md> >>>> - SE-0082 - Package Manager Editable Packages >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0082-swiftpm-package-edit.md> >>>> - SE-0088 - Modernize libdispatch for Swift 3 naming conventions >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0088-libdispatch-for-swift3.md> >>>> - SE-0089 - Renaming String.init<T>(_: T) >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0089-rename-string-reflection-init.md> >>>> - SE-0092 - Typealiases in protocols and protocol extensions >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0092-typealiases-in-protocols.md> >>>> - SE-0096 - Converting dynamicType from a property to an operator >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0096-dynamictype.md> >>>> - SE-0099 - Restructuring Condition Clauses >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0099-conditionclauses.md> >>>> - SE-0101 - Reconfiguring sizeof and related functions into a >>>> unified MemoryLayout struct >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0101-standardizing-sizeof-naming.md> >>>> - SE-0102 - Remove @noreturn attribute and introduce an empty Never >>>> type >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0102-noreturn-bottom-type.md> >>>> - SE-0103 - Make non-escaping closures the default >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0103-make-noescape-default.md> >>>> - SE-0104 - Protocol-oriented integers >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0104-improved-integers.md> >>>> - SE-0107 - UnsafeRawPointer API >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0107-unsaferawpointer.md> >>>> - SE-0110 - Distinguish between single-tuple and multiple-argument >>>> function types >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0110-distingish-single-tuple-arg.md> >>>> - SE-0111 - Remove type system significance of function argument >>>> labels >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0111-remove-arg-label-type-significance.md> >>>> - SE-0120 - Revise partition Method Signature >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0120-revise-partition-method.md> >>>> - SE-0127 - Cleaning up stdlib Pointer and Buffer Routines >>>> >>>> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0127-cleaning-up-stdlib-ptr-buffer.md> >>>> >>>> These are all changes the community has approved for Swift but did not >>>> make today's cutoff. Some of these proposals have implementations actively >>>> underway. For those proposals already in active development — *and >>>> near completion* — I am okay with extending the deadline for those >>>> changes to *Friday, July 29*. Such changes need to be approved by the >>>> release manager (myself) and should be merged into master via a pull >>>> request. When creating the pull request, please assign it to me ( >>>> tkremenek), and mention the pull request on the swift-dev mailing list >>>> as well with the SE number in the email title. >>>> >>>> The rest of the unimplemented proposals do not make Swift 3. This >>>> leaves us with the question of what to do with them. These proposals >>>> represent the known and reviewed changes we want to make to Swift, but >>>> inevitably there will *also* be changes that we don't even know about >>>> today that we will want to take into Swift that can impact core source >>>> stability. That said, we also have a very strong desire to maintain source >>>> compatibility with Swift 3 and Swift 4 as much as possible to provide some >>>> stability for which Swift users to build upon. The challenge of course is >>>> reconciling these diametrically opposing goals: maintaining source >>>> stability while having the ability to incorporate more core (and important) >>>> language changes that are possibly source-breaking. >>>> >>>> The Swift team at Apple has reflected on this and decided what it >>>> "means" for Swift 3 to be source compatible with Swift 4 and later releases >>>> going forward. Our goal is to allow app developers to combine a mix of >>>> Swift modules (e.g., SwiftPM packages), where each module is known to >>>> compile with a specific version of the language (module A works with Swift >>>> 3, module B works with Swift 3.1, etc.), then combine those modules into a >>>> single binary. The key feature is that a module can be migrated from Swift >>>> 3 to 3.1 to 4 (and beyond) independently of its dependencies. >>>> >>>> While the exact details of how we will accomplish this feat are still >>>> being discussed, here is a sketch of how this will likely work in the Swift >>>> 4 timeframe. The key enabler is a new compiler flag that indicates the >>>> language version to compile for (e.g., similar to the clang -std=c99 flag). >>>> The compiler flag will be provided by the build system you are using (e.g., >>>> Xcode, SwiftPM, etc.) on a per-module basis: >>>> >>>> - >>>> >>>> For language syntax/semantics, the compiler can use the language >>>> mode to properly implement the language version being used by a module. >>>> - >>>> >>>> For the Standard Library, additive and subtractive changes are >>>> easily handled (the former by just adding them, the later by using >>>> deprecation techniques). For semantics changes, things are much more >>>> complicated, and will need further study. >>>> >>>> The great thing about this approach is that a single Swift 4 compiler >>>> is building all of the sources in an application. This allows us to roll >>>> out this approach before achieving full ABI stability — something that will >>>> be a goal for Swift 4, but is impractical to achieve for a Swift 3.x >>>> release. It also provides us a general framework in the future for handling >>>> source compatibility as Swift evolves. >>>> >>>> To make this more concrete, suppose an application is written to use >>>> Swift 4, but uses packages via SwiftPM that are written using Swift 3. A >>>> single compiler would build both the app and the packages — thus ensuring >>>> that all the compiled sources are binary compatible. It would not be the >>>> case that a framework built with the Swift 3 compiler could be used by an >>>> app built using the Swift 4 compiler. That kind of library binary stability >>>> (ABI) will be a key goal of the Swift 4 release. >>>> >>>> These constraints mentioned above will serve as scaffolding for Swift 4 >>>> development. Discussion about Swift 4 commences on Monday. Ahead of that, >>>> Chris Lattner plans to send out thoughts from the Core team on some of the >>>> known key goals (and non-goals) for the release. In the meantime, the focus >>>> over the next couple days should be taking stock of what has landed for >>>> Swift 3 and to see if any of the proposals mentioned above are close to >>>> being completed or are truly out of scope. >>>> >>>> Thank you again to everyone for making Swift 3 such as fantastic >>>> release! >>>> >>>> Ted >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
