>       * What is your evaluation of the proposal?

-1.  I don’t like the idea of a user-defined `$` identifier.  I agree with the 
reasons for removing it.  If it is allowed as a user-defined entity it feels an 
operator is more appropriate.  Otherwise, it could be reserved as a special, 
compiler-defined identifier (like that `$n` closure argument identifiers) for 
future use in some way.

>       * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change 
> to Swift?

No, removing it was a good decision.

>       * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?

No.  Despite it’s use in some popular libraries it has always seemed out of 
place as an identifier to me.

>       * If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar feature, 
> how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?

I have used JavaScript libraries that use this convention.  I don’t think this 
style of library design is a good fit for Swift.

>       * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick 
> reading, or an in-depth study?

Quick read.

> 
> More information about the Swift evolution process is available at


_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Reply via email to