My personal theory of the whole phase-one construct is that it's just a way to
calm everyone down, so that there is more time to actually do some work on the
code ;-)
Afair, the conversation about this didn't fade out slowly, but was stopped by
someone saying "that addition is to big to be considered now".
I'm to lazy to fight with the medium to find a reference, but there is a draft
for a proposal:
https://github.com/SwiftInofficialEvolution/Home/wiki/compile-time%20parameters
<https://github.com/SwiftInofficialEvolution/Home/wiki/compile-time%20parameters>
I think the idea is quite useful, but it might be confusing for some people
that they can create Vector<Int, size: 4> but not Vector<Int, size: myIntValue>.
The issue with the latter is obvious when you fully understand the concept, but
if myIntValue is known to be a constant at compile time (or a fixed case of an
enum…), it's harder to decide wether the compiler should accept it.
In some aspect, the parameters have requirements that are opposite to "inout" —
but that's a very fresh thought, and I've no idea if that duality might help.
- Tino
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
