Thanks Matthew. Personally I would really like to see an analysis of the tradeoffs therein covered in the proposal in some way.
-Colin (via thumbs) > On May 4, 2016, at 8:23 PM, Matthew Johnson <matt...@anandabits.com> wrote: > > >>> On May 4, 2016, at 6:56 PM, Colin Barrett via swift-evolution >>> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: >>> >>> Swift numeric types all currently have a family of conversion initializers. >>> In many use cases they leave a lot to be desired. Initializing an integer >>> type with a floating point value will truncate any fractional portion of >>> the number. Initializing with an out-of-range value traps. >> >> >> Have you considered whether it makes sense to keep these around? Maybe the >> failable ones should be the default, and give the other ones a more >> descriptive 1st argument label. > > That’s a good question. It might be a good idea, but I wanted to keep this > proposal small and non-breaking to maximize chances of acceptance. I would > support that change to the proposal if the core team was interested in going > that direction. > >> >> -Colin >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
