[swift-evolution] Proposal: conversion protocol naming conventions
a.br at me.com
Tue Dec 15 11:48:28 CST 2015
+1 from me.
Proposal is 'simple' and helps improve the overall clarity of the language.
Perhaps add CustomStringProjectable and deprecate CustomStringConvertible in 2.2?
> On 15 Dec 2015, at 16:28, Matthew Johnson via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> Bumping this thread. There wasn’t much response to the initial post, which may have been because Saturday night is probably not the best time to post a proposal. :)
> You can find the draft here: https://github.com/anandabits/swift-evolution/blob/conversion-protocol-conventions/proposals/0000-conversion-protocol-conventions.md
> The little feedback I did receive was positive.
>> On Dec 12, 2015, at 8:40 PM, Matthew Johnson via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> I have drafted a proposal to establish precise conventional meaning for the use of `Convertible`, `Representable`, and `Projectable` protocol suffixes. The proposal would require renaming `CustomStringConvertible` and `CustomDebugStringConvertible` to `CustomStringProjectable` and `CustomDebugStringProjectable` respectively
>> I am seeking input on the proposal before submitting a PR. The full draft can found at https://github.com/anandabits/swift-evolution/blob/conversion-protocol-conventions/proposals/0000-conversion-protocol-conventions.md.
>> swift-evolution mailing list
>> swift-evolution at swift.org
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution