What is your evaluation of the proposal? +1 Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to Swift?
Yes Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift? Yes How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, or an in-depth study? I've followed the thread and gave the proposal a quick reading. This has reminded me that we are still without a means to specify that a type have value semantics, though. On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > And what if we ever decide that restricting protocols to structs or enums > should be allowed as well? > > AnyValue (_might_ happen with value sub typing)? > > Or maybe there are secret plans to add new reference types to Swift? > > Classes aren’t the only reference types in Swift, functions are also > reference types, but there is no way to express something like _any > function_. > > The question is, if the *new* reference types will be objects or something > different. Otherwise we’ll simply need to add AnyReference or something > similar to that. > > There was a huuuuge talk about AnyValue vs. AnyObject last year, and I’m > totally convinced with AnyObject. The Any prefix also indicates that it’s > an existential which is correct in this context. > > > > -- > Adrian Zubarev > Sent with Airmail > > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > >
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution