I thought this was it, but none of the default implementations of RangeReplaceableCollection seem to use this empty initialiser (except for the two other initialisers and `removeAll(keepingCapacity:)`, the latter of which can be implemented using `removeSubrange(_:)` instead). This makes me wonder whether this is the right protocol to put an empty initialiser.
> On 6 Jul 2016, at 20:12, Tino Heth <2...@gmx.de> wrote: > > Hi there, > >> The requirement of the empty initialiser makes it impossible to have a >> collection conform to this protocol that needs additional data for its >> initialisation. > But if there is no guarantee for an empty initializer, you always need a > piece of data to create an instance — and when you do heavy "metaprogramming" > (generics, protocols…), it can become very hard to supply this additional > data. > In those situations, it is very valuable when you can create an object out of > thin air… > > Tino _______________________________________________ swift-users mailing list swift-users@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
