> On Oct 11, 2016, at 12:26 AM, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > This is the latest draft of the proposal: > https://github.com/DevAndArtist/swift-evolution/blob/refactor_existential_metatypes/proposals/0126-refactor-metatypes.md > > <https://github.com/DevAndArtist/swift-evolution/blob/refactor_existential_metatypes/proposals/0126-refactor-metatypes.md> > Refactor Metatypes > > Proposal: SE–0126 > <x-msg://5/0126-refactor-metatypes-repurpose-t-dot-self-and-mirror.md> > Authors: Adrian Zubarev <https://github.com/DevAndArtist>, Anton Zhilin > <https://github.com/Anton3>, Brent Royal-Gordon <https://github.com/brentdax> > Status: Revision > Review manager: Chris Lattner <http://github.com/lattner> > Revision: 2 > Previous Revisions: 1 > <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/83707b0879c83dcde778f8163f5768212736fdc2/proposals/0126-refactor-metatypes-repurpose-t-dot-self-and-mirror.md> > In this new notation, some of our existing standard library functions would > have signatures like: > > func unsafeBitCast<T, U>(_: T, to type: Type<U>) -> U > func ==(t0: AnyType<Any>?, t1: AnyType<Any>?) -> Bool > func type<T>(of instace: T) -> AnyType<T> // SE-0096 Are we not going to have func staticType<T>(of instance: T) -> Type<T> ?
(Also you mis-spelled “instace”) Overall I like it and the whole scheme brings some nice clarity. Russ
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
