> On Nov 9, 2016, at 1:24 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> on Wed Nov 09 2016, John McCall <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>>> On Nov 9, 2016, at 9:25 AM, Anton Zhilin via swift-evolution
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> • Upon implementation of SE-0077 in Swift 3, some libraries started to drop
>>> operators entirely:
>> link #1, link #2.
>>> • Declarations of the same custom operator with different precedence groups
>>> create a conflict.
>>> • The conflict can be resolved manually, but the resolution has to be made
>>> in every file that uses
>> the operator, which defeats the reason for using operators in the first
>> place.
>>> • This is a part of a larger problem of conflict resolution, for which we
>>> don’t currently have a
>> systematic approach.
>>
>> It makes sense to me to provide a more module-wide conflict resolution
>> mechanism. Maybe we can have some sort of "internal export" mechanism
>> where a file can introduce imports into other files within a project.
>>
>>> • Many libraries dealing with custom operators choose
>>> to import Runes, which is basically a stockpile of operator
>>> declarations. But it conflicts with Result, Swiftx and Operadics.
>>
>> Won't this just shake itself out pretty soon, assuming these projects
>> have any interest in interoperating?
>
> This is a well-known library interoperability dynamic, and IMO we can't
> expect the solution for conflicting libraries to be that you have to get
> the library authors to communicate with one another. That effectively
> fixes nothing for the poor app developer who integrates these libraries.
I agree that we need to solve that problem, which is why I suggested an approach
for solving that problem in the previous paragraph. But it's still reasonable
for us as
"wardens of the ecosystem" to ask library authors to consider how their
libraries
interoperate with their peers.
We can also make a stronger effort to ignore spurious conflicts in the
language, of
course, e.g. by only complaining if conflicting precedencegroup declarations
would
yield different parsing results; but that logic would get unworkably complex
pretty quick.
John.
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
