> On 14 Jun 2017, at 19:08, Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 1:01 PM, David Hart via swift-evolution
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Sorry, initially sent off-list:
>
> I think this proposal is a great idea. But I would vote for the alternative
> of only having default and implicitly deducing extend when default is not
> specified:
>
> This wouldn't work with the fundamental design decision that these are
> optional keywords, which IMO is absolutely key.
Hmm, I'm inclined to agree with David that only the default keyword really
seems like it's necessary, and that extend can be implied.
My preference would be to just add the default keyword, and have breaches
treated as warnings using the current behaviour, which we can eliminate and
elevate to an error in future once people have had a chance to change their
code.
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
