I'm also late to the thread (and the ABI stability discussion in general). Is there a reference online that describes the reason for desiring ABI stability? I mean, I get, generally, why we need it. But I'd like to see the arguments for why we need it *now*, before certain other things are in place. Not saying the reasons for the urgency aren't valid, I just don't know what they are.
Thanks! > On Jan 25, 2017, at 08:44 , Freak Show via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > This is both great to hear (ivar introspection available) and a little > disappointing (method level not). Basically, I would hope for at least > enough to allow implementation of KVC - which would require the ability to > find and invoke methods by name. > > > >> On Jan 24, 2017, at 14:16, Joe Groff <jgr...@apple.com> wrote: >> >> a lot of the information you'd need for many dynamic features is already >> there, and planned to be stabilized as part of the ABI. We already emit >> reflection data that describes the physical layouts of types, and once those >> formats are stabilized, building a library that interprets the metadata is >> additive (and could conceivably be done by a third party independent of the >> standard library). There may not be metadata for individual methods yet > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution -- Rick Mann rm...@latencyzero.com _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
