[swift-evolution] [Review] Replace `typealias` keyword with `associatedtype` for associated type declarations

[T.J. Usiyan]

+1 from me. It is a solid change that addresses an oddity in the language.

On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 7:27 AM, plx via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

> I like this.
>
> On Jan 3, 2016, at 1:38 AM, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution <
> swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>
> Hello Swift community,
>
> The review of "Replace `typealias` keyword with `associatedtype` for
> associated type declarations” begins now and runs through Wednesday,
> January 6th. The proposal is available here:
>
>
> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0011-replace-typealias-associated.md
>
> Reviews are an important part of the Swift evolution process. All reviews
> should be sent to the swift-evolution mailing list at
>
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>
> or, if you would like to keep your feedback private, directly to the
> review manager.
>
> What goes into a review?
>
> The goal of the review process is to improve the proposal under review
> through constructive criticism and, eventually, determine the direction of
> Swift. When writing your review, here are some questions you might want to
> answer in your review:
>
> * What is your evaluation of the proposal?
>
>
> It’s a good idea and improves the language.
>
> * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change
> to Swift?
>
>
> Yes, the existing situation is comprehensible (if you think like a
> language-implementer) but highly non-intuitive and generally sub-optimal
> for language users.
>
> * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?
>
>
> Yes; conservation-of-reserved-terms is valuable, but giving different
> things different names fits the feel much better here.
>
> * If you have you used other languages or libraries with a similar
> feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?
>
>
> To the extent I’m aware of analogous situations in other languages, none
> of them actually seem to use distinct keywords, but they also don’t have
> the confusing situation Swift has vis-a-vis typealiases with concrete
> definitions (in protocols).
>
> * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading,
> or an in-depth study?
>
>
> Quick read, plus having been bit by issues the proposal addresses numerous
> times.
>
>
> More information about the Swift evolution process is available at
>
> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md
>
> Cheers,
> Doug Gregor
> Review Manager
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160103/6984aef4/attachment.html>