On Jan 15, 2018, at 11:01 PM, Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > - Can we change the semantics? Maybe, but I doubt ExpressibleByFloatLiteral > can be outright replaced. You're not the first to wonder about how to design > an alternative protocol. Dig through the archives and you'll find some > existing ideas. My two cents: The main alternative base in question here is > 10. However, decimal storage formats and binary storage formats share so > little in common that any initializer common to both will be extremely > unwieldy for one or both formats. Personally, somewhere down the road, I'd > rather see Decimal64/128 become standard library types (already working on > it), DecimalFloatingPoint become a standard library protocol, and `0.1` > become a "decimal literal" (with Float, Double, Float80, and Decimal64/128 > all conforming) as distinct from a "float literal" that we could then > restrict to hexadecimal (?and binary) floating-point literals (and maybe > rename accordingly).
If we were motivated to fix this (and I’m not :-), then I think the best path forward would be to rename ExpressibleByFloatLiteral to something like ExpressibleByBinaryFloatLiteral. This would allow the introduction of a new ExpressibleByDecimalFloatLiteral with a different initializer requirement. I’m not motivated to fix this, because there is nothing actively broken by the current state of things. With the current name we can still introduce a ExpressibleByDecimalFloatLiteral someday in the future. The two names will be a little odd, but given the cost of changing it at this point, that seems perfectly acceptable. -Chris _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list email@example.com https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution