> On 22 Nov 2016, at 04:18, Ramiro Feria Purón via swift-evolution
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Thanks Dave!
>
> As another example, consider it as part of this common pattern:
>
> class A<T> {
> init() {
> // ..
> }
> }
>
> class B<T>: A<T> {
> override init() {
> // ..
> }
> }
>
> class Factory {
>
> class func makeA<T>() -> A<T> { return B<T>() }
> //..
> }
>
> Factory.makeA<Int>()
You can still do this using one of the following:
class Factory {
class func makeA<T>(_ theType:T.Type) -> A<T> { return B<T>() }
}
let foo = Factory.makeA(Int.self)
class Factory<T> {
class func makeA() -> A<T> { return B<T>() }
}
let foo = Factor<Int>.makeA()
i.e- we already have the tools to do this; in the form of inference, passing
the type, and adding the generic to the type itself. I guess I'm just not
seeing a clear advantage that the proposed syntax adds except to allowing
dropping of .self on the pass-the-type form of call._______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
