I agree. An NS_REQUIRES_SUPER equivalent was on my list of things to propose during stage 2, and I don't see a reason to enforce order.
> On Nov 25, 2016, at 04:42, Tino Heth via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> What are your thoughts on this? >> >> Just to throw out a strawman: >> >> // Warn if override doesn’t begin with “super.foo()” >> __attribute(swift_requires_super_call_at_begin) >> >> // Warn if override doesn’t end with “super.foo()” >> __attribute(swift_requires_super_call_at_end) > > I myself would already be happy if Swift had an equivalent to > NS_REQUIRES_SUPER (preferably with a different name ;-). > The ability to indicate that super shouldn't be called when overriding would > be nice as well ― both situations happen in Cocoa, and it isn't enforced, but > only documented. > > I don't have any examples where the position of the call to super matters, > and my personal opinion is that this feature wouldn't pay off: > Of course, there are situations where order is important ― but as with > willSet/didSet, it might only be important for the overriding class, not for > super. > > - Tino > _______________________________________________ > 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
