<div dir="ltr">As an FYI I have been playing around with things mostly to get my head around the base changes and implications on the existing stdlib implementation. It is very early still. I have no issues throwing it away if I am way off the rails.<div><br></div><div>Review - <a href="https://github.com/shawnce/swift/pull/1">https://github.com/shawnce/swift/pull/1</a></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 4:12 PM Dmitri Gribenko <<a href="mailto:gribozavr@gmail.com">gribozavr@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Shawn Erickson <<a href="mailto:shawnce@gmail.com" target="_blank">shawnce@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> First I see that Dmitri G. appears to be most involved with this yet in the<br>
> other thread I see Dmitri H. being copied. So which/both of you involved<br>
> with this effort? ...or are you one and the same given the similarity of the<br>
> name? /me hopes he doesn't look like a total idiot now<br>
<br>
I'm just one Dmitri.<br>
<br>
> Second given commit access limits it may make sense for those of us on the<br>
> "outside" to work in same fork (e.g. added as collaborators)? It may help<br>
> avoid pull request overhead between us while work is underway? My github<br>
> identity is "shawnce". I have a fork created<br>
> <a href="https://github.com/shawnce/swift" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/shawnce/swift</a> if so desired to use that as the sandbox<br>
> (set default branch to swift-3-indexing-model). ...looking for guidance on<br>
> how best to make things work efficiently.<br>
<br>
I'll check if it is possible to give you commit access.<br>
<br>
> I am digging into<br>
> <a href="https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/test/Prototypes/CollectionsMoveIndices.swift" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/test/Prototypes/CollectionsMoveIndices.swift</a><br>
> to understand the scope of the work involved.<br>
><br>
> Anyway I am looking at the current state of the code and I see things like<br>
> the following...<br>
> @available(*, unavailable, renamed="MutableCollection")<br>
> public typealias MutableCollectionType = MutableCollection<br>
> ...so it looks like the use of Type is being dropped in the updated naming<br>
> methodology? So this obviously implies... right?<br>
> // [new] protocol BidirectionalCollection : Collection {}<br>
> // [new] protocol RandomAccessCollection : BidirectionalCollection<br>
<br>
Right. The prototype is currently written using old names.<br>
<br>
Dmitri<br>
<br>
--<br>
main(i,j){for(i=2;;i++){for(j=2;j<i;j++){if(!(i%j)){j=0;break;}}if<br>
(j){printf("%d\n",i);}}} /*Dmitri Gribenko <<a href="mailto:gribozavr@gmail.com" target="_blank">gribozavr@gmail.com</a>>*/<br>
</blockquote></div>