> On May 9, 2016, at 8:34 AM, Matthew Johnson <matt...@anandabits.com> wrote:
>
>> I would prefer to wait until indirect structs and improved CoW support have
>> had more discussion.
>
> I've been thinking a lot about Dave's desire to "mandate" that value semantic
> types must be value types and allowing us to use reference identity for
> equality of reference types. I would support that if these features were in
> place so I think shifting to those topics is a good next step for this
> discussion.
>
> Along those lines, I've been thinking about a proposal to allow the indirect
> modifier on any property that has a value type. It may also be useful to
> allow the indirect modifier directly on struct and enum to allow type authors
> to indicate that all instances should be indirect. Do you think it would it
> be worthwhile to pursue this proposal now?
>
> Can you elaborate on what you have in mind with regards to improved CoW
> support? Is there any chance of doing something here in Swift 3?
I don’t have anything specific planned for CoW support in Swift 3, otherwise I
would have started a separate thread :)
-Andy
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
