> >> The current design says that dynamic and static calls are on equal footing. >> This implies to the programmer that either way of doing things is correct. A >> programmer from a dynamic environment is usually going to choose the dynamic >> way because it’s more powerful and easier to use. I just merely want the >> design to have a way of showing the programmer that they should think twice >> about using it in an implicitly failing way. Whether that be renaming the >> protocol to something like UnsafeDynamicMemberLookup or something else along >> the lines of what Swift currently does. > > I though the current design was all about easing the use of good libraries > that are currently only available in dynamic languages. > > Do you aim at a particular paragraph in > https://gist.github.com/lattner/b016e1cf86c43732c8d82f90e5ae5438#motivation-and-context > ? >
Sorry I meant that the current design implies that dynamic and static calls/lookups are on equal footing (If not equal then very close). This is because conformance to DynamicMemberLookup is really easy. This wasn’t about the motivation section specifically. _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
