> On Dec 21, 2015, at 8:06 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > >> On Dec 21, 2015, at 5:33 PM, Joe Groff via swift-evolution >> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: >> >> >>> On Dec 21, 2015, at 5:21 PM, Jordan Rose <jordan_r...@apple.com> wrote: >>> >>> :-( I'm worried about increasing the size of the language this much. I >>> really want to be able to say "behaviors are just syntactic sugar for >>> declaring accessors and storage, and then everything else behaves >>> normally". This makes them another entirely orthogonal decl kind, like >>> operators. >> >> I'd prefer not to have a new decl as well, if that was the best choice. >> However, it's still just syntactic sugar for declaring accessors and storage. > > I think there’s value for users in being able to group and scope the > components associated with a particular behavior, so IMO it’s worth it. > Overall, it makes usage of the language less complex in practice. >
+1 > -Dave > > > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
