> On May 31, 2016, at 12:56 PM, Austin Zheng via swift-evolution 
> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
> 
> This is pretty much where my thinking about the topic has led me as well. 
> I'll resign this topic to pursue some other, hopefully more relevant work, 
> although anyone who wants to continue the discussion is welcome to.

I don’t necessarily agree with the reasoning, but I agree with the conclusion. 
For me, something like variadic generics isn’t even be in scope for Swift *4*, 
because other generics features (e.g., the Matthew Johnson’s list) are already 
enough for the full Swift 3 release… and probably too much to tackle in a year.

I do think that variadic generics can fit into our dynamic-dispatched 
implementation model, and am not at all convinced that these problems are 
better solved by macros, but I’m happy to have that discussion more than a year 
from now :)

        - Doug

> 
> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Chris Lattner <clatt...@apple.com 
> <mailto:clatt...@apple.com>> wrote:
> 
>> On May 31, 2016, at 12:17 PM, L Mihalkovic via swift-evolution 
>> <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> well there is no macro system, and for the moment a clear statement from 
>> chris that this is not on the table in the short term. the code in the 
>> example looked like run-of-the-mill swift, except for the “…". so that 
>> leaves us with swift looking code that would be executed by the compiler, 
>> but with nothing particular to tell which parts to and which not. just a 
>> thought.
> 
> Lets be clear though: variadic generics are not in scope for Swift 3 either.  
> 
> I definitely don’t speak for the rest of the core team, nor have I discussed 
> it with them…  but IMO, this whole feature seems like a better fit for a 
> macro system than it does to complicate the generics system.  Unlike C++’s 
> template system, our generics system inherently has runtime / dynamic 
> dispatch properties, and I don’t think that shoehorning variadics into it is 
> going to work out well.
> 
> -Chris
> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On May 31, 2016, at 7:59 PM, Austin Zheng <austinzh...@gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:austinzh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> How so? I'm interested in anything that can get us away from having to 
>>> generating code at compile-time.
>>> 
>>> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 10:04 AM, L. Mihalkovic 
>>> <laurent.mihalko...@gmail.com <mailto:laurent.mihalko...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> What's interesting about the code in the manifesto is that it looks very 
>>> much like "..." is a runtime construct, as opposed to trying the get the 
>>> compiler to do the heavy lifting.
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> swift-evolution mailing list
>> swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution 
>> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to