What is your evaluation of the proposal? It seems to be a very straightforward and natural extension of existing syntax to bring Swift closer to the functionality of Objective-C and other languages.
My only concern is that using `AnyObject` at first glance seems less descriptive than ‘class’ when used in a protocol declaration, but it may be simply because I already familiar with the `class` syntax. Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to Swift? Absolutely. Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift? Yes. It is a sensible extension to existing patters. Eliminating the redundancy and ambiguity in `class` and `AnyObject` eliminates a barrier to understanding the language and is probably worth the pain of deprecating `class` which I have used extensively in my code. If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those? I have used the feature numerous times in Objective-C over the years and this proposal is a perfect analog as far as I know. How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, or an in-depth study? I gave the proposal a thorough reading. It is straightforward enough to not require much study. > On Feb 28, 2017, at 2:11 PM, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > Hello Swift community, > > The review of SE-0156 "Class and Subtype existentials" begins now and runs > through March 7, 2017. The proposal is available here: > > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0156-subclass-existentials.md > > <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0156-subclass-existentials.md> > Reviews are an important part of the Swift evolution process. All reviews > should be sent to the swift-evolution mailing list at > > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution> > or, if you would like to keep your feedback private, directly to the review > manager. When replying, please try to keep the proposal link at the top of > the message: > > Proposal link: > > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0156-subclass-existentials.md > > <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0156-subclass-existentials.md> > Reply text > > Other replies > > <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/pull/607/files#what-goes-into-a-review-1>What > goes into a review? > > The goal of the review process is to improve the proposal under review > through constructive criticism and, eventually, determine the direction of > Swift. When writing your review, here are some questions you might want to > answer in your review: > > What is your evaluation of the proposal? > Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to > Swift? > Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift? > If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar feature, how do > you feel that this proposal compares to those? > How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, or > an in-depth study? > More information about the Swift evolution process is available at > > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md > <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md> > Thank you, > > -Doug > > Review Manager > > _______________________________________________ > 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
