> Am 18.10.2017 um 22:36 schrieb Michael Ilseman <milse...@apple.com>: >> To get back to the topic at hand: I propose to differentiate between >> unordered and ordered collections because I think that this is an important >> distinction with tractable impact on algorithms (as shown above). The method >> `elementsEqual` would be part of the ordered sequence protocol and I would >> suggest the name `elementsPairwiseEqual`. >> > > You are free to propose that and justify its cost. You'll probably want to > plan on how you’ll present the cost/benefit analysis for the feedback of “why > not just slap a warning on Set/Dictionary?”
The warning will have to be slapped on `Sequence` because I and others can write types adopting Sequence but being unordered. And it will have to be slapped on every public generic function written by anyone which takes a Sequence as argument and internally uses `elementsEqual` on that argument, so that the user of such an API knows that he cannot use that function with a Set or another unordered subtype of Sequence. -Thorsten
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
