@Brent, What aspects of the current proposal do you have reservations about?
-- Howard. On 3 May 2017 at 18:09, Brent Royal-Gordon <br...@architechies.com> wrote: > On May 3, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > I definitely agree that it's a feature that _can_ be used unwisely, but > the fact remains that it _is_ used pervasively in the standard library, and > deliberately > > > I'm not so sure that's true. Which standard library protocols > intentionally depend upon certain parts to not be overridable? Are they so > pervasive that we wouldn't prefer to just mark those members that need it > with a `final` keyword? If John McCall woke up tomorrow with some genius > idea of how to make extension methods overridable with zero overhead, would > we choose to keep the current design? > > That's not to say the proposal at hand is a good idea, but I think you're > overselling the current design. > > -- > Brent Royal-Gordon > Architechies > >
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
