> On Oct 3, 2017, at 10:21 PM, Jonas B <bobe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Yeah, but the compiler could handle NSObject as a special case. Are there
>> enough other special cases that it is worth documenting and exposing a
>> fragile attribute on classes to the user?
>>
>
> Pitching in here.. currently if you do something remotely complex with
> protocols and generics you need a bunch of classes for type erasure.
>
> I don’t want to think about what happens if you annotate a class with the
> "open” access modifier as @fragile/@inlineable though. Would @fragile become
> transitive? :)
I don’t think it would be transitive. For instance NSObject is “fragile”
because the compiler can assume it has a known size, but certainly that is not
true for most subclasses of NSObject.
Slava
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
