That would work as well, but it has the downside of forcing a potentially huge 
number of methods to be implemented in a single place, reducing the readability 
as opposed to packing them into semantically related groups in the form of 
extensions.

Also, please include the original message for reference purposes.

> On Aug 2, 2017, at 12:18 PM, Tino Heth <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> The problem is real, but afaics, there is some consensus that the best 
> solution is to allow default implementations inside the protocol declaration:
> Less typing, no new keywords, easy to understand.
> 
> - Tino
> 

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
  • [swift-evolution] [Proposa... Gor Gyolchanyan via swift-evolution
    • Re: [swift-evolution]... Tino Heth via swift-evolution
      • Re: [swift-evolut... Gor Gyolchanyan via swift-evolution
        • Re: [swift-ev... Tino Heth via swift-evolution
          • Re: [swif... Gor Gyolchanyan via swift-evolution
            • Re: ... Víctor Pimentel Rodríguez via swift-evolution
              • ... Gor Gyolchanyan via swift-evolution
            • Re: ... Tino Heth via swift-evolution
              • ... Gor Gyolchanyan via swift-evolution
                • ... Tino Heth via swift-evolution
                • ... Gor Gyolchanyan via swift-evolution
                • ... Mike Sanderson via swift-evolution
                • ... Gor Gyolchanyan via swift-evolution

Reply via email to