FWIW, the common RangeProtocol unifying both Range and ClosedRange existed for a while when the new collection indexing model was being implemented.
Here is the commit removing it: https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/2108/commits/8e886a3bdded61e266678704a13edce00a4a8867 <https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/2108/commits/8e886a3bdded61e266678704a13edce00a4a8867> Max > On Jan 12, 2017, at 12:11 PM, David Hart via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello, > > Since the release of Swift 3, I’ve seen quite a few people (me included) > experience a lot of friction with the new types for representing ranges. I’ve > seen people confused when writing an API that takes a Range as argument but > then can’t pass in a ClosedRange. Sometimes this can be fixed because the API > should be written against a more general protocol, but sometimes that’s not > the case. > > Those new types definitely seem to cause more problems than they fixed (the > Int.max problem). Has the Standard Library team put any thought into this? > > Regards, > David. > _______________________________________________ > 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
