—
Daryle Walker
Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie
darylew AT mac DOT com
> On Jul 12, 2017, at 4:30 PM, Gor Gyolchanyan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I agree, given the current state of Swift, fixed-sized arrays are way too
> magical.
Any more “magical” than the existing primitive types?
> I’d suggest postponing the idea of fixed-sized arrays (even though I myself
> have ached for them for a long time now) until its prerequisites are met.
>
> There are three language features that have been discusses before that are
> required for this:
> Variadic generic parameters.
> Tuples as nominal types with a variadic generic parameter and a tuple
> concatenation ability.
> Non-type generic parameters (probably, only compile-time value types).
Improved generics would synergize with fixed-size arrays, but are not a
prerequisite.
Wouldn’t nominal tuples be structures? Not that it matters here since FSAs
aren’t quirky tuples. (I mentioned in the proposal that no language that I know
of does this; homogenous and heterogenous product types are always distinct
kinds of types.)
> In these terms, a fixed-sized array would be a type that takes an Int as a
> generic parameter and uses a variadic tuple for its storage. If C++ templates
> has taught us anything is that metaprogramming can be used for achieving
> fantastic compile-time wizardry, like converting a single integer generic
> parameter and a single generic type parameter to a generic homogeneous
> variadic type parameter (by using a recursively defined variadic parameter
> dummy type).
I thought Swift was to avoid that kind of wizardry. And unless you don’t want
any of the optimizations array operations get, then the compiler has to analyze
tuple types to trigger “array mode."
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
