https://docs.docker.com/toolbox/toolbox_install_mac/
On 23 October 2016 at 06:56, T.J. Usiyan via swift-evolution < [email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the heads up! It wasn't just meant for you. Use of a generic > Result type is one of my motivating cases. > > 1. If multiple libraries declare a generic type like that, converting > between them becomes a pain. > 2. Specific result types are useful and appropriate in many, if not most, > cases. > 3. protocols and retroactive conformance could make this less challenging > > On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 3:42 PM, David Sweeris <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Was not sending your reply only to me and not the list intentional? It’s >> fine either way, I was just about to send this to the list when I realized >> you’d only sent your reply to me, and I don’t want quote you somewhere if >> you intentionally didn’t post there. >> >> On Oct 22, 2016, at 1:39 PM, T.J. Usiyan <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I would actually hope otherwise. A real benefit of enums is compile time >> guarantees. I am looking for a generic means to represent and handle a set >> of possible outcomes. Not in the hopes of making everything fully generic >> but lessening the redundant parts of dealing with, for example, Result >> types. >> >> >> I think you can do that now... >> enum Result<Payload> { >> case success(Payload) >> case failure(Error) >> } >> >> Then in your function… >> func foo<T> (r: Result<T>) { >> ... >> switch r { >> case .success(let p): ... >> case .failure(let e): ... >> } >> ... >> } >> >> Or am I just not understanding you? >> >> - Dave Sweeris >> > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
