Proposal updated, same URL: https://github.com/jrose-apple/swift-evolution/blob/non-exhaustive-enums/proposals/nnnn-non-exhaustive-enums.md <https://github.com/jrose-apple/swift-evolution/blob/non-exhaustive-enums/proposals/nnnn-non-exhaustive-enums.md>.
Thanks again for all the feedback so far, everyone! Jordan > On Sep 12, 2017, at 17:55, Jordan Rose via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > Sorry, I got distracted by other tasks! Both the discussion here and within > Apple has moved towards making "non-exhaustive" the default, which, to be > honest, I too think is the best design. I'll update the proposal today to > reflect that, though I still want to keep both the "nonexhaustive" and > "exhaustive" keywords for Swift 4 compatibility for now (or whatever we end > up naming them). The compatibility design is a little less ambitious than > Brent's; as currently proposed, Swift 4 mode continues to default to > 'exhaustive' all the time, even in the actual Swift 5 release. > > I still want to respond to Brent's points directly, but I think you and > Vladimir have done a good job discussing them already. I'll send out the > updated proposal tomorrow, after I have a little more time to think about > #invalid. > > Thanks for putting time into this! > Jordan > > >> On Sep 9, 2017, at 17:34, Rod Brown <rodney.bro...@icloud.com> wrote: >> >> Jordan, >> >> Do you have any other thoughts about the ongoing discussion here, especially >> regarding Chris’ comments? As you’re the one pushing this forward, I’d >> really like to know what your thoughts are regarding this? >> >> - Rod > > _______________________________________________ > 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
