Here is an alternative view. I've been thinking about this and I feel that
instead of adding this to an enum why not make RawRepresentable structs a swift
construct.
You could declare it like this:
enum struct {
case a, b, c
}
This would be a struct that acts like an enum but it is open like a
RawRepresentable but using the enum case sugar.
> On Sep 5, 2017, at 5:37 PM, Jordan Rose via swift-evolution
> <[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]> 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]> 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.
>>> 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
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
