> On Aug 2, 2017, at 4:35 AM, Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 7:38 PM, Taylor Swift <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Xiaodi Wu <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 13:00 Taylor Swift via swift-evolution 
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Michael Ilseman via swift-evolution 
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Aug 1, 2017, at 10:44 AM, Tino Heth via swift-evolution 
>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> So, this has been discussed before on the list many times in the past. The 
>>> core team has stated that their preferred process for this is to have 
>>> individuals write their own libraries, get real-world adoption, then (as 
>>> consensus emerges) propose their inclusion as a core library.
>> I already opened a new mail to write my answer, but than I thought "wait, 
>> scroll down, and look if Xiaodi did already post links" ;-)
>> [But where have those potential core libraries been mentioned?]
>> 
>> Anyways, my perception hasn't change much:
>> I think it would be enough if someone from Apple would say "here's an empty 
>> github-repo called 
>> [math/statistics/algebra/crypto/graphic/image/audio/music/video/smtp/http…]; 
>> feel free to fork and create pull requests" and adding some democratic 
>> mechanism for acceptance on top of it.
>> 
> 
> What would be your compatibility and stability expectations of such APIs? If 
> there are any expectations, then the APIs would need careful design and 
> thought. The Swift project faces a lot of design bandwidth limitations, so 
> prioritize is always tricky.
> 
> 
> The point of spinning off separate core library working groups would be so 
> that library feature requests and proposals can stop clogging up 
> swift-evolution. Then the swift-evolution core team could focus on the 
> compiler and the standard library and the community would take stewardship of 
> the core libraries through separate channels.
> 
> My understanding is that the server working group, and all such work groups, 
> will be presenting their proposals here for approval, and that all API 
> changes in the Swift open source project go through this list.
> 
> That sounds like it would spam the general list a lot?
> 
> On the contrary, core team members have confirmed that working proposals such 
> as those are the principal intended use for this list; it is *not* meant to 
> be a general forum for musings about Swift language design.
>  

My rule of thumb was that any post on the mailing list that I make has to be 
aimed at providing a solution to a problem, or at the very least, seeking help 
in providing a solution to a problem. If the discussion has no definitive 
actionable outcome, then I consider it pointless.

> Wouldn’t a more decentralized model mitigate the “we don’t have the 
> energy/attention to devote to this” complaint?
> 
> Also as a gauge of interest, I’m wondering who here would like to work on a 
> core library if a campaign to build some was started now.
> 
> 
> 
>> But as long as no one with enough reputation starts Swifts equivalent of 
>> boost, there won't be a set of established libraries for basic data 
>> structures and algorithms outside the stdlib.
>> 
>> For anyone who thinks there's no need for a standard lib that is not the 
>> stdlib, have a look at
>> https://developer.apple.com/documentation/glkit/glkquaternion-pc6 
>> <https://developer.apple.com/documentation/glkit/glkquaternion-pc6>
>> https://developer.apple.com/documentation/scenekit/scnquaternion 
>> <https://developer.apple.com/documentation/scenekit/scnquaternion>
>> https://developer.apple.com/documentation/coremotion/cmquaternion 
>> <https://developer.apple.com/documentation/coremotion/cmquaternion>
>> :-(
>> 
>> Tino
>> _______________________________________________
>> swift-evolution mailing list
>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution 
>> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution 
> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution 
> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to