> * What is your evaluation of the proposal? +1. This clarifies the interaction between Swift and Objective-C and reduces the magic that exists for bridging. It’s one more step on the road of Swift relying less on the Objective-C runtime - decoupling the semantics of `dynamic` from `@objc` is a great thing.
This has potential to be the rockiest feature to migrate to Swift 4 thus far. I like Michel’s idea of an option in the migrator to apply `@objc` everywhere it is inferred today. This would help teams that rely on dynamic interactions with the Objective-C runtime to migrate safely. > * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to > Swift? Yes. It cleans up semantics that can be confusing today and makes Objective-C interactions more explicit. > * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift? Yes. > * If you have you used other languages or libraries with a similar feature, > how do you feel that this proposal compares to those? There is a long history of bridging in the Apple ecosystem. Annotation for bridged declarations is customary. > * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, or > an in-depth study? A quick read. > > More information about the Swift evolution process is available at: > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md > > Thanks! > > -Chris Lattner > 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
