Sent from my iPhone > On 11 Jul 2016, at 09:42, Tino Heth via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > >> The justification for this proposal is all about supporting the people who >> are working to design library APIs right, and about maintaining consistency >> with the design philosophy of Swift. To wit: in Swift, where there’s a >> default choice, it’s the safe one; > I challenge this claim: > Safety is valued, but Swift cares (and should care!) about pragmatism as > well… the most obvious example that comes to my mind are arrays, which have > no safeguards that stop you from accessing elements that aren't there. > >> where there’s a consequential design decision, it’s explicit. > When there is no explicit statement about subclassiblily, it's reasonable to > assume that there hasn't been a consequential design decision… but sadly, > discussion like this mainly driven by dogmatism,
Hence why it is important to recognise this, whether it is us doing it or others, and nip it in the bud. I do not want orthodoxy wars with people yelling at each other about who is the truest Swiftiest supporter of the one true Swift dogma :P. > because there is no evidence for either side. > _______________________________________________ > 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
