> On Dec 7, 2017, at 11:29 AM, Letanyan Arumugam <letanya...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think a better approach would still be to try and get the author of the
> type to make the right choice in the first place.
After rereading the post you linked to last night
(https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mon-20171204/042015.html
<https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mon-20171204/042015.html>),
I think it could quickly get out of hand. It might be simple enough for
DynamicMemberLookup, but once we get to the point of discussing DynamicCallable
there are many more variations.
- Calls that return Void
- Calls that return an optional
- Calls that return an IUO
- Calls that throw
- etc.
I know this is a discussion about DynamicMemberLookup, but DynamicCallable is
closely related and I imagine will end up following a similar pattern. How
would you propose that DynamicCallable would be annotated in this fashion?
There are a number of types of calls, and some are orthogonal so the
combinations quickly add up. People will probably have similar concerns about
failed call lookups as they do about member lookups.
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
