> On Mar 26, 2017, at 11:12 AM, Karl Wagner via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I’d like to pitch the following two language changes. Both of them are > technically possible today if you manually write thunks for the relevant > protocol requirements, but it would be nice if we allowed them to be written > directly: > > 1) Allow closures to satisfy function requirements in protocols
I have mixed feelings about this one because of the argument labels issue. > > 2) Allow functions with default parameters to satisfy function requirements > in protocols > This would be an excellent improvement. I don’t think it needs an SE proposal, it is “obvious” how it would work. I would also add the following for full generality: 3) Allow enum cases without payloads to satisfy static read-only property requirements 4) Allow enum cases with payloads to satisfy static method requirements Slava
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
