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

on Fri May 13 2016, Nate Cook wrote: >>> On May 13, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution >>> wrote: >>> >>> on Mon May 09 2016, Nate Cook wrote: >>> >>> Yet another alternative would be to drop Set and Dictionary down a

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

on Fri May 13 2016, Joe Groff wrote: >> On May 13, 2016, at 7:30 AM, Dave Abrahams wrote: >> >> >> on Mon May 09 2016, Joe Groff wrote: >> > On May 9, 2016, at 6:23 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution

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

on Tue May 10 2016, Joe Groff wrote: >> On May 6, 2016, at 3:16 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution >> wrote: >> >> >> I am posting this review on behalf of Dmitri Gribenko, Max Moiseev, and >> myself. > >> >> on Tue May 03 2016,

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

on Fri May 13 2016, Nate Cook wrote: >>> On May 13, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution >>> wrote: >>> >>> on Mon May 09 2016, Nate Cook wrote: >>> >>> Yet another alternative would be to drop Set and Dictionary down a >>> level to a

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

on Fri May 13 2016, Joe Groff wrote: >> On May 13, 2016, at 7:30 AM, Dave Abrahams wrote: >> >> >> on Mon May 09 2016, Joe Groff wrote: >> > On May 9, 2016, at 6:23 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution wrote: > *

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

>> On May 13, 2016, at 9:36 AM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution >> wrote: >> >> on Mon May 09 2016, Nate Cook wrote: >> >> Yet another alternative would be to drop Set and Dictionary down a >> level to a FiniteSequence protocol in between Sequence and >>

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

> On May 13, 2016, at 7:30 AM, Dave Abrahams wrote: > > > on Mon May 09 2016, Joe Groff wrote: > >>> On May 9, 2016, at 6:23 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution >>> wrote: >>> * Operations that depend on sorted-ness and use

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

on Mon May 09 2016, Nate Cook wrote: > Yet another alternative would be to drop Set and Dictionary down a > level to a FiniteSequence protocol in between Sequence and > Collection. Basically none of the index-based collection APIs > (i.e. everything except `count` and `isEmpty`) make sense on

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

on Mon May 09 2016, Joe Groff wrote: >> On May 9, 2016, at 6:23 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution >> wrote: >> >>> * Operations that depend on sorted-ness and use binary predicates should >>> not be available on all Collections; they're too easy to misuse,

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

on Mon May 09 2016, Brent Royal-Gordon wrote: >> * Operations that depend on sorted-ness and use binary predicates should >> not be available on all Collections; they're too easy to misuse, >> they're hard to name well, and as Nicola Salmoria has noted, they >> would not make any sense at

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-0074: Implementation of Binary Search functions

> Am 10.05.2016 um 04:48 schrieb Joe Groff via swift-evolution > : > >> >> On May 9, 2016, at 6:23 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution >> wrote: >> >>> * Operations that depend on sorted-ness and use binary predicates should >>>

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

> On May 6, 2016, at 3:16 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution > wrote: > > > I am posting this review on behalf of Dmitri Gribenko, Max Moiseev, and > myself. > > on Tue May 03 2016, Chris Lattner wrote: > >> Hello Swift community, >>

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

> On May 9, 2016, at 10:28 PM, Nate Cook via swift-evolution > wrote: > >> On May 9, 2016, at 9:48 PM, Joe Groff via swift-evolution >> > wrote: >> >>> >>> On May 9, 2016, at 6:23 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon

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

> On May 9, 2016, at 9:48 PM, Joe Groff via swift-evolution > wrote: > >> >> On May 9, 2016, at 6:23 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution >> wrote: >> >>> * Operations that depend on sorted-ness and use binary predicates should >>>

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

> On May 9, 2016, at 6:23 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution > wrote: > >> * Operations that depend on sorted-ness and use binary predicates should >> not be available on all Collections; they're too easy to misuse, >> they're hard to name well, and as Nicola

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

>> Proposal: >> >> >> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0074-binary-search.md >> >> > On May 6, 2016, at 5:16 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution >

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

> * Operations that depend on sorted-ness and use binary predicates should > not be available on all Collections; they're too easy to misuse, > they're hard to name well, and as Nicola Salmoria has noted, they > would not make any sense at all for a Set. > > * They should be scoped to a kind

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

I am posting this review on behalf of Dmitri Gribenko, Max Moiseev, and myself. on Tue May 03 2016, Chris Lattner wrote: > Hello Swift community, > > The review of "SE-0074: Implementation of Binary Search functions" > begins now and runs through May 9. The proposal

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

* What is your evaluation of the proposal? +1 * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to Swift? Yes * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift? Yes * If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar

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

> * What is your evaluation of the proposal? > +1. These are self-evidently useful functions. One issue: not sure I understand why the "customization points" are necessary as part of this particular proposal. If it's to support "future sorted collections," then the best motivating use

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

Hello Swift community, The review of "SE-0074: Implementation of Binary Search functions" begins now and runs through May 9. The proposal is available here: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0074-binary-search.md Reviews are an important part of the Swift