on Mon Aug 08 2016, Jacob Bandes-Storch <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
> Hi Dave, > I just filed https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-2303. > > Brainstorming: is it important that the init(stringInterpolation:) and > init(stringInterpolationSegment:) requirements are on the same type? As far as I'm concerned the design space is wide open. > Perhaps it would work to separate these two requirements, allowing the > segments to construct intermediate types, and only requiring the type > adopting ExpressibleByStringInterpolation to implement > init(stringInterpolation:). > > This would be nice because it would be much easier for types which aren't > enums to conform to ExpressibleByStringInterpolation. In my auto layout > example (https://gist.github.com/jtbandes/9c1c25ee4996d2554375), the > ConstraintCollection type is only an enum because it has to provide all the > initializers, but it's strange that the cases are accessible publicly; I'm not sure whether what you're describing is just a limitation in our access control (a public type conforming to a protocol must expose all of that protocol's requirements as public members). If so, maybe we should fix *that*, rather than morphing designs to work around it. That said, I don't really have time to think about the design of ExpressibleByStringInterpolation in detail at the moment, as we're right up against the Swift 3 ship date (sorry!) If you'd bring it up in a few months I'm sure I'll have a lot more bandwidth for it. Thanks, -- -Dave _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
