On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 5:57 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution < [email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sep 13, 2016, at 12:29 PM, Brian Gesiak via swift-evolution < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > I hadn't thought about a unified overlay for POSIX. I think the > simplified import alone has benefit to warrant its own evolution proposal. > Would it be possible to have a separate discussion for the POSIX overlay > idea? Or is there a reason that I'm missing that prevents the import from > being viable on its own? (Apologies in advance if there's an obvious answer > to this question!) > > I've heard the argument before that we should do a full overlay, but I > think this is becoming a case of the perfect being the enemy of the good. > Having some sort of "just import whatever the system libc is called" module > would be a significant improvement in practice over the state of the art, > even if we don't do any other adaptation. > > Here's what I would suggest. We have a convention for exposing "raw" > imports of C libraries: you call them `C\(libraryName)`. So I would suggest > we introduce a `CLibc` module which provides a raw import of the system's > libc. If we later decide to do a full-featured overlay, that's great—we can > call it `Libc`. But `CLibc` by itself would be an improvement over the > status quo and a step in the right direction. > I do believe that an even terser name has been suggested in the past for libc, to avoid the repetition: just `C`. > > -- > Brent Royal-Gordon > Architechies > > _______________________________________________ > 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
