Hi Jordan, I like this new direction. But I have Rod’s inverse question: have you considered only having the nonexhaustive keyword? Similar to how non-final doesn't exist because its opposite is the default behaviour. That would also free us from searching for a good pair of keywords and only find one good keyword (extensible, expandable, …) which doesn’t contain a negative.
David. > On 6 Sep 2017, at 02:36, Jordan Rose <[email protected]> wrote: > > It's in the "Alternatives Considered" section. :-) That was my desired design > when we started, but feedback convinced me that the break from Swift 4 mode > would be too drastic. The same valid code would have a different meaning > whether you were writing Swift 4 or Swift 5. > > Jordan > > >> On Sep 5, 2017, at 17:30, Rod Brown <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Hi Jordan, >> >> I’m not sure how much bearing on this my comment will have. >> >> Have you considered having only “exhaustive” as a keyword, and make the >> default non-exhaustive? It seems that “exhaustive" would be the rarer case, >> as it promises a lot more about compatibility (much like there is no such >> thing as “non-final”). Also, non exhaustive seems a massive mouthful despite >> it probably being the correct term. >> >> - Rod >> >>> On 6 Sep 2017, at 10:19 am, Jordan Rose <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> I've taken everyone's feedback into consideration and written this up as a >>> proposal: >>> https://github.com/jrose-apple/swift-evolution/blob/non-exhaustive-enums/proposals/nnnn-non-exhaustive-enums.md >>> >>> <https://github.com/jrose-apple/swift-evolution/blob/non-exhaustive-enums/proposals/nnnn-non-exhaustive-enums.md>. >>> The next step is working on an implementation, but if people have further >>> pre-review comments I'd be happy to hear them. >>> >>> Jordan >
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
