I believe we just have to separate these concepts explicity : i.e.
"dynamicType" and "Self"(as replacement for type name in protocol)
Yes, seems like we need Self and #Self to separate these. Or we should
select a better names, if we have better suggestions.
On 20.04.2016 23:27, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution wrote:
On Apr 20, 2016, at 12:37 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution
<swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
on Wed Apr 20 2016, Chris Lattner <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
Hello Swift community,
The review of "SE-0068: Expanding Swift Self to class members and value types"
begins now and runs through April 25. The proposal is available here:
https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0068-universal-self.md
Caveat: somewhat scattered response, probably after insufficient
review; apply salt liberally.
This looks like a good idea overall to me, but I think it may leave
important uses for Self on the floor. For example, I still want to
write this:
struct SomeType {
func f(x: Self) {}
}
Does the proposal make that work in some way that I've overlooked?
IMO it's a shame that you can't take a protocol body, dump it into your
type's body, and fill in the implementations to satisfy a conformance
without finding all the instances of “Self” and replacing them with your
type's name, and it would be sad if this proposal didn't address that
somehow. In general, I'm concerned that we may be making “Self” mean
two very different things in different contexts: IIUC one is a type
that's fully-resolved at compile time, and the other one is a value that
holds a metatype. If there were less of a wall between the two
uses/contexts, that would make the proposal more palatable to me.
It kind of did address this until late last night. I was worried that proposing
#Self and Self at the
same time would be divisive. The point of #Self would be a compile-time
replacement of the name
of the defining type, vs the run-time evaluation of Self. Trying to propose two
things at once
seemed like a difficult sell.
If there's sufficient support for doing so, I can add it back in as a revision
to the proposal if
the core team requests it.
-- E
_______________________________________________
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
