> On Mar 8, 2017, at 22:34, Ankit Aggarwal <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> +1, although I don’t know why we're supporting this: >> // 1.5.8 ..< 2.0.0 >> .package(url: "/SwiftyJSON", from: "1.5.8"), >> when, at least as far as I can tell, this: >> // 1.5.8 ..< 2.0.0 >> .package(url: "/SwiftyJSON", .uptoNextMajor("1.5.8")), >> does the same thing, and the spelling is, at least to me, clearer as well. >> Dunno, maybe the “from” version is a term of art that I’m just not familiar >> with. > > Hi David, > > Thank you for the review. > > It is true that `from` and `.uptoNextMajor` are exactly same. We think that > the most widely used requirement will be `.uptoNextMajor`, so we wanted to > provide a shorthand for it.
Ok, I just wanted to make sure having both spellings was intentional. I've been trying to think of a shorthand that's clearer, but haven't really come up with anything. Seems like we're fighting English's grammar... With the non-shorthand spelling, the "normal" way to write that would have the version first, followed by the modifier. Adapted to pseudo-code, it would be `1.5.8.uptoNextMajor()`, which Swift currently can't support. And "from" is typically followed by "to" or "through", which makes the shorthand kinda odd as well. Sorry, I should've noticed this during the discussion thread. Since this the review thread, though, I want to make it clear that I'm still +1, and think this spelling issue (to the extent that it is one) isn't worth derailing the proposal. - Dave Sweeris
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
