> On Apr 4, 2016, at 11:00 AM, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution
> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
>
> Are there reasons that prevent using `Self` as a synonym for an instance's
> type name?
>
[...]
>
> I'd like to see `Self.staticMember` introduced as a synonym for
> `TypeName.staticMember`.
I would love to see a way to get the type of the "enclosing thing at compile
time”. In my particular case, I’m using the type as a generic parameter to tag
a created resource with something like:
class Client: PropertyOwner {
let intProperty = Client.property(“name”, Int(0))
}
where PropertyOwner has a static property<Owner, DataType>(...)
With `Self` meaning the static version of the thing being compiled, I could at
least write:
class Client: PropertyOwner {
let intProperty = Self.property(“name”, Int(0))
}
which would have the benefit of being harder to mess up due to copy-pasting
between different PropertyOwner implementors.
I would love to be able to omit the `Self.` entirely, but instances can’t call
functions on themselves at init time, and instances don’t see static funcs, so
that probably won’t fly =)
The particular spelling of ‘static self` doesn’t matter too much to me, so if
`Self` needs to be the runtime type of the executing class then maybe
`StaticSelf` could be added.
-tim
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
