Sorry to be late :/ On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution < [email protected]> wrote: > > * What is your evaluation of the proposal? >
More positive than the first one, but still some rough edges. One concern that I still have is that if we use @objcMembers, @nonobjc methods/properties are going to be even trickier to find. If such modifier existed, I would like the compiler to warn me of public methods/properties that cannot be bridged to ObjC, because I have explicitly told the compiler that I want this object to live in the ObjC runtime. Of course, with a fixit recommending something like explicitly using @nonobjc. * 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, I think. * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, > or an in-depth study? > In-depth study of the previous version and this new one too. -- Víctor Pimentel
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
