Re: [swift-evolution] SE-0031 and Swift 2

2016-04-16 Thread Jonathan Tang via swift-evolution
FWIW the Python 3 migration found removal of old syntax and introduction of new syntax in the same release to be hugely problematic, and ended up back-porting a lot of Python 2 syntax features into 3.1 & 3.2 to ease the transition. The problem is that large codebases are very rarely controlled by

Re: [swift-evolution] What about a VBA style with Statement?

2016-04-14 Thread Jonathan Tang via swift-evolution
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 8:23 AM, Tino Heth via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > > (in Smalltalk, like in Swift?, if i remember correctly, ‘self’ is > implicitly > > returned in absence of a return value and can be ignored. > I'm a big fan of returning self — its much more u

Re: [swift-evolution] What about a VBA style with Statement?

2016-04-14 Thread Jonathan Tang via swift-evolution
Very strong -1 to implicit 'with'. Javascript tried this and it was a disaster, and eventually banned in strict mode. It tends to make compilation and optimization of a variable within a 'with' block impossible, as it could refer to the fields of any object, or even a method call behind protocol

Re: [swift-evolution] deployment targets and frameworks

2016-04-06 Thread Jonathan Tang via swift-evolution
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > On Apr 5, 2016, at 4:04 PM, Drew Crawford wrote: > > > On Apr 5, 2016, at 12:06 PM, Douglas Gregor wrote: > > I would not want this to be implicit behavior: it should be recorded in > the s

Re: [swift-evolution] deployment targets and frameworks

2016-04-04 Thread Jonathan Tang via swift-evolution
+1 to this. It's really important for getting a sane third-party library ecosystem working. I assume that the @available annotation generated would also work for watchOS, tvOS, etc. frameworks. How would it work for non-iOS Swift platforms? I'm not terribly familiar with how #available works on

Re: [swift-evolution] A (better) Swift Equivalent For The Classical For-Loop With Numeric Scalars

2016-03-22 Thread Jonathan Tang via swift-evolution
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:05 AM, ted van gaalen via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > Hello Taras > Please take a look here: > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/For_loop > > More than 30 ! programming languages since 1957 until now, have their > implementation of the for-loop.

Re: [swift-evolution] SE-0025: Scoped Access Level, next steps

2016-03-20 Thread Jonathan Tang via swift-evolution
On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Charles Kissinger via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > > On Mar 14, 2016, at 7:38 PM, Sean Heber via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > > > I, too, prefer it to be more like this: > > > > public // unchanged > > modul