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

Jacob Bandes-Storch jtbandes at gmail.com
Tue Jan 5 23:42:13 CST 2016


> What is your evaluation of the proposal?

+1 for changing the name, but -1 for "associatedtype" in particular.
Alternate suggestions:

   - associatedType Element
   - associated_type Element
   - associated type Element
   - associated Element
   - type Element
   - having Element


> Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to
Swift?

Yes.


> Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?

I don't feel that the multi-word-yet-all-lowercase name fits with the rest
of the Swift language. See alternate suggestions above.


> How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading,
or an in-depth study?

Extensive experience with the feature, but I have mostly just skimmed the
emails in this (and the preceding) thread.

- Jacob

On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 10:38 PM, 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?
> * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change
> to Swift?
> * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?
> * If you have you used other languages or libraries with a similar
> feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?
> * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading,
> or an in-depth study?
>
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160105/1f6c931a/attachment.html>


More information about the swift-evolution mailing list