+1000 I would like to be even more conservative, only locking down the things we know we have received actual human attention of some sort. The all-or-nothing approach is actively harmful in my mind.
Thanks, Jon Sent from my iPhone > On Jan 9, 2018, at 6:30 PM, Nevin Brackett-Rozinsky via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > I’m just spitballing here, and I’m not an expert on matters of ABI, however > the thought occurs to me that the current all-or-nothing approach might lead > to suboptimal results. > > In particular, some recent discussions on this list have mentioned that > certain parts of the standard library, such as Mirror, really ought to be > redesigned. But their current shape is on track to be baked into the > permanent ABI, even though we know right now that we can do better. > > Has any consideration been given to the possibility of carving out specific > exemptions to ABI stability for Swift 5, and saying something like, “The > entire ABI will be stabilized, except for Mirror (and possibly a small number > of other things)”? > > That way we can nail down almost all of the ABI, while still being able to > fix the parts that we can already see need fixing. Perhaps I am being naive > here, and I’m sure there are major aspects I am unaware of, but from my > layperson’s perspective it seems rather silly to tie ourselves to a legacy > implementation that we want to redesign. > > Nevin > _______________________________________________ > 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
