[...]
>> in what other circumstances do we insist that the compiler inform the end
>> user about future additions to the API at compile time?
>
> This isn’t a request for the compiler to inform the user about future
> additions to an API. It is a request to validate the compiler’s knowledge of
> the current state of an API with the current state of the source code.
>
> Well, it's of course impossible to inform the user about future additions, so
> that's poorly phrased on my part. It's about the compiler informing the end
> user about *new* additions, part of the *current* state of the API, that have
> cropped up since the user last revised the code when the API was in a
> *previous* state (or, indistinguishably, members of which a user is unaware
> regardless of the temporal sequence of when such members were added). In what
> other circumstances do we insist that the compiler perform this service?
Enums. That's literally how they work today. You are arguing in favor of
actively removing compiler-aided correctness.
There's also protocol requirements and, arguably, deprecated methods with a
proper message ("use foo instead").
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
