Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0191: Eliminate IndexDistance from Collection

Hi list, > On 28. Nov 2017, at 02:34, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution > wrote: > > The review of SE-0191 "Eliminate IndexDistance from Collection" begins now > and runs through December 3, 2017. The proposal is available here: > > • What is your evaluation

Re: [swift-evolution] [Concurrency] async/await + actors

Hello, first off, I’m following this discussion with great interest, even though my background (simulation software on HPC) has a different focus than the “usual” paradigms Swift seeks to (primarily) address. > On 3. Sep 2017, at 19:26, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution >

Re: [swift-evolution] Contextualizing async coroutines

Hello, > On 31. Aug 2017, at 20:35, Joe Groff via swift-evolution > wrote: > > # `onResume` hooks > > Relying on coroutine context alone still leaves responsibility wholly on > suspending APIs to pay attention to the coroutine context and schedule the >

Re: [swift-evolution] [swift-users] How does "Sequence.joined" work?

> On 9. Aug 2017, at 06:51, Taylor Swift via swift-users > wrote: > > It’s possible to implement a classic red-black tree in Swift that performs > better than a sorted Array, down to about n = 1,500 items, not n = 100,000 > items as it claims. (Actually, heap

Re: [swift-evolution] [Planning][Request] "constexpr" for Swift 5

Hello, > On 30. Jul 2017, at 08:52, Gor Gyolchanyan via swift-evolution > wrote: [snip] > This is a huge undertaking, but if we split it in two parts: "executing at > compiletime" and "exposing swift’s frontend”, this could surely be done by > Swift 5. From all

Re: [swift-evolution] [swift-evolution-announce] [Review] SE-0181: Package Manager C/C++ Language Standard Support

Hi, > On 13. Jul 2017, at 00:58, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution > wrote: > > I agree. It would be worth considering splitting this into two different > dimensions: base language standard (90, 94, 99, 11) vs gnu/clang extensions > (on/off). GNU extensions are

Re: [swift-evolution] Revisiting SE-0110

Hi Elviro, > On 23. Jun 2017, at 13:46, Elviro Rocca via swift-evolution > wrote: [snip] > …by showing code that’s marginally different from each other, like one more > nesting of parentheses, or one less label for a parameter. It seems to me > that distinctions

Re: [swift-evolution] Add ability to validate collection indices

Hi, > On 16 Dec 2016, at 14:56, Alexey Komnin via swift-evolution > wrote: [snip] > What do you think? I feel, like we should discuss it before I > formalize it as a proposal. I think this is a fruitless attempt, as even if the indices are still valid, they may not

Re: [swift-evolution] [Proposal] Refining Identifier and Operator Symbology

Hi, while I don’t really have an opinion on the proposal overall, the following > As an exception, in homage to Swift's origins, we permit  and  in > identifiers. seems pointless and complicates things for no apparent gain (other than satisfying Chris’ requirement… ;)), so I’d remove those

Re: [swift-evolution] Mark protocol methods with their protocol

> On 20 Sep 2016, at 02:25, Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution > wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Boris Wang wrote: >> I don't think "override" is a good idea. It's not overriding. >> >> Protocol is not Class. >> > > I think you make a

Re: [swift-evolution] [Meta] What does the backlog mean to the process?

Hi, > On 29 Jul 2016, at 17:15, Félix Cloutier via swift-evolution > wrote: > > Hello all, > > With the Swift 3 deadline passed, according to the Swift Evolution progress > page, about 20% of the proposals that the community voted in won't make it > for Swift 3.

Re: [swift-evolution] Variadic generics discussion

> On 29 May 2016, at 02:33, Austin Zheng wrote: > >> - I have an argument pack. How would I apply a function taking a single >> argument to each element in the pack? Go via the tuple? > > This is definitely something that needs to be worked out. The C++ pack expansion

Re: [swift-evolution] Variadic generics discussion

Hi, > On 28 May 2016, at 22:03, Austin Zheng via swift-evolution > wrote: > > Hello swift-evolution, > > I put together a draft proposal for the variadic generics feature described > in "Completing Generics" as a major objective for Swift 3.x. It can be found >

Re: [swift-evolution] [swift-evolution-announce] [Returned for revision] SE-0089: Renaming String.init(_: T)

> On 27 May 2016, at 07:14, Patrick Smith via swift-evolution > wrote: > > >> On 27 May 2016, at 2:40 PM, Austin Zheng via swift-evolution >> wrote: >> >> Any of the NSObject subclass candidates may require their `description`s to >>

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0074: Implementation of Binary Search functions

> On 10 May 2016, at 19:36, Joe Groff via swift-evolution > wrote: > > I worry that attaching these methods to a strongly-typed `Sorted` wrapper > limits their appeal. It's useful to be able to binary-search through data in > a standard container that's known to be

Re: [swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0067: Enhanced Floating Point Protocols

> On 19 Apr 2016, at 23:16, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution > wrote: > > Hello Swift community, > > The review of "SE-0067: Enhanced Floating Point Protocols" begins now and > runs through April 25. The proposal is available here: > > >

Re: [swift-evolution] Notes from Swift core team 2016-03-23 design discussion

Hi Alex (and all other note-takers), these notes are helpful and really appreciated. Thanks for making them available. :) Daniel. ___ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org