Any/AnyObject are constraints for an existential container. Protocol conformances are also existential constraints, but not quite the same thing as Any/AnyObject.
Rather than adding negative constraints, I think we need a richer set of more specific positive constraints. - Karl > > On Aug 1, 2017 at 12:50 am, <Daryle Walker via swift-evolution > (mailto:[email protected])> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 1:49 PM, Robert Widmann <[email protected] > > (mailto:[email protected])> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 10:34 AM, Daryle Walker via swift-evolution > > > <[email protected] (mailto:[email protected])> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Part of the response that closed [SR-5589] as “Won’t Do” was: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > AnyObject is no longer a protocol > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Then, what is it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Relevant https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/8749 > > > > > > So… it got moved one layer down of indirection? > > > > Hmm, what would this mean for a similar “protocol”? One that has a member > attached. (My “strong type-alias” proposal has all such named types derived > from an “AnyAlternative” protocol, which derives from “RawRepresentable” and > adds another associated type.) > > > > > > > — > > Daryle Walker > Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie > darylew AT mac DOT com > > _______________________________________________ swift-evolution > mailing list [email protected] > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
