I think it's some subtlety... I might vaguely remember someone saying something about it. Since a proposal didn't come of that, I'm assuming there was a technical issue or something. I could easily be wrong, though.
- Dave Sweeris > On Jul 25, 2017, at 9:36 PM, Daryle Walker via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > [Sorry if this's been discussed before.] > > As long as the superclass sub-object gets initialized, it shouldn't matter if > the initializer was designated or convenience. Is there some subtle step on > the two-phase initialization I'm missing? Or is this a point to extend in a > future version of Swift? > > Sent from my iPhone > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
