dgregor at apple.com
Thu Aug 25 16:58:46 CDT 2016
> On Aug 25, 2016, at 2:48 PM, Jordan Rose <jordan_rose at apple.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 25, 2016, at 9:38, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com <mailto:dgregor at apple.com>> wrote:
>>> On Aug 24, 2016, at 3:57 PM, Jordan Rose <jordan_rose at apple.com <mailto:jordan_rose at apple.com>> wrote:
>>> Hey, all. I’m here to propose predefining a macro __swift__ when C code is compiled with Swift. We’ve gotten a few requests for it in the past and haven’t done it so that people don’t write header files that arbitrarily restrict features when used from Swift, or check for "Swift" when they really should be checking for modules support, or Objective-C mode, or nullability support. (Or worse, they guard code under __swift__ and then don’t ever test it, leading to failures to import the module from Swift.)
>>> However, with Swift 3, it’s now become important for Objective-C authors to be able to control how their APIs look in modern Swift 3 without disrupting existing clients on Swift 2.3. (Or just because Swift 3 style looks out-of-place in Swift 2.3.) The most obvious way to do this would be to define a macro that has the Swift version in it. For Swift version X.Y.Z, we could use something like
>>> for Swift 3.0.1.
>>> This is option (1).
>> Option (1) sounds good to me. We don’t need to make this complicated.
> Okay. Next question: two digits or three digits for the minor and patch versions?
> - Two digits: if we ever switch to year/month combinations like C/C++, those will be higher values (unless we get to Swift 20 first).
> - Three digits: better for "fake" versions like 3.0.100.
I think we can just stick with 2 digits.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-dev