>
> What is your evaluation of the proposal?
This proposal is excellent. A big thanks goes out to everyone who worked on it!
The \ sigil may not make for the prettiest syntax but our options are very
limited and it is a vast improvement over the previous draft. If the core team
likes the :: suggestion others have made I would be also be fine with that if
we could elide the leading `.` in the shorthand version but would prefer not to
have to write `::.`. Overall, the choice of sigil is relatively unimportant to
me. The important thing IMO is that it is concise and will work great in DSLs.
> Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to
> Swift?
Yes. The lack of unbound property references is a big hole in the language.
> Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?
Absolutely.
> If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar feature, how do
> you feel that this proposal compares to those?
I have used lenses a bit in my own code. Key paths are a really awesome way to
build them right into the language with syntactic support that is not possible
for libraries.
> How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, or
> an in-depth study?
In depth study.
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
