Another alternative is to add a protocol extension with blank/harmless/default methods for things that are optional and always call 'em.
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Haravikk via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > I’m not sure, why not just define an additional protocol with the optional > method(s) you’d like to add? The whole point of protocols is to guarantee > access to some baseline capability, so I’m not sure that optional > capabilities are well covered except by adding new protocols that extend > each other. > > Objective-C conversion has the ability because Objective-C is unusual by > comparison thanks to its ability to have “method calls” (messages) with no > actual destination. I think it’s good for Swift to be more structured and > strict than that. > > > On 30 Mar 2016, at 15:08, Yuval Tal via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I find that optional protocol methods to be very useful. However, there > is a caveat -- it needs to be mapped to @objc. This puts a set of > limitations, such as: structures cannot be used as parameters as it does > not map to objective-c. What do you think about removing the requirement of > using @objc and allow to create optional methods without these limitations? > > > > Thank you, > > > > -Yuval > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > -- k...@circlew.org http://www.CircleW.org/kurt/
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
