Re: [swift-evolution] [Pitch] separate syntax of class inheritance and protocol conformance

> On Aug 2, 2016, at 12:08 AM, Haravikk wrote: > >> >> On 1 Aug 2016, at 21:40, Charlie Monroe > > wrote: >> >>> >>> On Aug 1, 2016, at 10:22 PM, Haravikk via swift-evolution >>>

Re: [swift-evolution] [Discussion] Breaking precedence

Right. I asked about this issue some months ago on this list, and Chris was very patient to confirm that what you described was indeed the thinking behind the rationalized precedence of bitwise operators in Swift. On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 23:18 Félix Cloutier wrote: >

Re: [swift-evolution] [Discussion] Breaking precedence

I disagree. The binary operators have properties that are comparable to arithmetic operators, and their precedence is easy to define as such. & has multiplication-like properties (0*0=0, 0*1=0, 1*0=0, 1*1=1); | has addition-like properties (0+0=0, 0+1=1, 1+0=1, 1+1=2); ^ has subtraction-like

Re: [swift-evolution] Swift 3.1 discussions, go?

Well, it depends on what kind of Math you’re trying to do. The Accelerate framework is available if you need performance. Saagar Jha > On Aug 1, 2016, at 18:01, Muse M via swift-evolution > wrote: > > Have always wonder why Maths in Swift is slower than C and Go,

Re: [swift-evolution] Swift 3.1 discussions, go?

Have always wonder why Maths in Swift is slower than C and Go, it should be address with priority if Swift is to be adopt for engineering, financial and science industry. On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 4:43 AM, Charlie Monroe via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > See >

Re: [swift-evolution] [Swift4] Mailing list vs. Forum

> On Aug 1, 2016, at 3:09 PM, Goffredo Marocchi wrote: > > Before iOS 10's Mail.app with its forced long preview of quoted messages in > every reply, which makes it just that much harder to overview the various > replies in an e-mail thread, I would have been more

Re: [swift-evolution] [Pitch] separate syntax of class inheritance and protocol conformance

> On 1 Aug 2016, at 21:40, Charlie Monroe wrote: > >> >> On Aug 1, 2016, at 10:22 PM, Haravikk via swift-evolution >> wrote: >> >> >>> On 1 Aug 2016, at 19:05, Goffredo Marocchi via swift-evolution >>>

Re: [swift-evolution] [Discussion] Breaking precedence

> On Aug 1, 2016, at 3:01 PM, Anton Zhilin via swift-evolution > wrote: > 2016-08-02 0:52 GMT+03:00 Xiaodi Wu >: > On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Anton Zhilin via swift-evolution >

Re: [swift-evolution] [Swift4] Mailing list vs. Forum

> On Jul 29, 2016, at 6:22 PM, Jacob Bandes-Storch via swift-evolution > wrote: > > We've discussed forums on swift-evolution before. Maybe it's time for another > go, with Swift 3 winding down. > > For context, prior discussions are on this thread: >

Re: [swift-evolution] [Discussion] Breaking precedence

2016-08-02 0:52 GMT+03:00 Xiaodi Wu : > On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Anton Zhilin via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > >> Disclaimer: I have not (yet) prepared a proposal, or even something that >> could be considered a draft, but I want to hear

Re: [swift-evolution] [Discussion] Breaking precedence

On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Anton Zhilin via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > Disclaimer: I have not (yet) prepared a proposal, or even something that > could be considered a draft, but I want to hear public opinion on the topic. > > SE-0077 (about precedence groups) has

Re: [swift-evolution] [Pitch] separate syntax of class inheritance and protocol conformance

-1 I hope that this does not seem too hash but I think that this would be a gratuitous change and it would not provide any benefit to me. With protocol extensions, the difference between classes and protocols is not that great. As far as I am converted, this change would just complicate the

Re: [swift-evolution] Swift 3.1 discussions, go?

See https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mon-20160725/025711.html >From what I understand, the discussion should stay focused on the main topics >for Swift 4 that Chris highlighted in

Re: [swift-evolution] [Pitch] separate syntax of class inheritance and protocol conformance

> On Aug 1, 2016, at 10:22 PM, Haravikk via swift-evolution > wrote: > > >> On 1 Aug 2016, at 19:05, Goffredo Marocchi via swift-evolution >> wrote: >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On 31 Jul 2016, at 21:19, Sean Alling via

Re: [swift-evolution] [Pitch] separate syntax of class inheritance and protocol conformance

> On 1 Aug 2016, at 19:05, Goffredo Marocchi via swift-evolution > wrote: > > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On 31 Jul 2016, at 21:19, Sean Alling via swift-evolution >> wrote: >> >> I disagree with this suggestion. Both a protocol

[swift-evolution] Swift 3.1 discussions, go?

It was stated that 27th of July was the last date for proposal acceptance, 29th of July was the last day for implementation, and 1th of August should be the starting day of Swift 3.1-related discussions. Am I right? Should we begin? ___ swift-evolution

Re: [swift-evolution] [META] Gmane and Swift Evolution

Hey I’ll update (SE0017 - SE0045) Thanks -Krishna > On Aug 1, 2016, at 8:33 PM, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution > wrote: > >> On Jul 31, 2016, at 8:51 PM, Ben Rimmington > > wrote: >> >>> >>> On 1 Aug 2016,

Re: [swift-evolution] [Pitch] separate syntax of class inheritance and protocol conformance

Sent from my iPhone > On 31 Jul 2016, at 21:19, Sean Alling via swift-evolution > wrote: > > I disagree with this suggestion. Both a protocol conformance & class > inheritance define behavior conformance. If anything the protocol is more > explicitly shown

Re: [swift-evolution] Multi dimensional - iterator, Iterator2D, Iterator3D

I'm replying on Swift-Users and bcc'ing in Swift-Evolution to comply with the core team's request to focus SE on the current mission statement. At some point soon, Russ Bishop's PR https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/3600 will be incorporated into

Re: [swift-evolution] [META] Gmane and Swift Evolution

> On Jul 31, 2016, at 8:51 PM, Ben Rimmington wrote: > >> >> On 1 Aug 2016, at 00:00, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution >> > wrote: >> On Jul 31, 2016, at 15:42, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution

Re: [swift-evolution] [META] Gmane and Swift Evolution

I think this news is worth to be linked to the thread "[swift-evolution] [Swift4] Mailing list vs. Forum" — but there's just no good way to do so ;-)___ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org

Re: [swift-evolution] [Swift4] Mailing list vs. Forum

+1 for moving all from email because of all that has been said, any decent forum would be better really but I also love Discourse and would love to have Swift discussions officially through it. Hirundo looks really really nice but to me it is an example of how email is not enough, not the