[swift-evolution] [Proposal]: Rectangles and other common structures.
charles at charlesism.com
Wed Jan 6 23:51:13 CST 2016
I support this, not because I find NS- and CG- geometric structs confusing.
I support it because I'm hoping Swift library versions would be generic. I
would be very glad to see us get *Rect<Double>* or *Point<Int>* as part of
the standard library.
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:32 PM, John Randolph via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> > On Jan 5, 2016, at 10:10 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon <brent at architechies.com>
> >> As an OS X and iOS developer, it sometimes seems that I work with
> [GG|NS]Point, [GG|NS]Rect, and [GG|NS]Size almost as much as I use Float or
> String. I’d love to see Swift’s standard library include Rect, Point, and
> Size types, with bridging to make them “just work” with any UIKit or AppKit
> API that expects their NS or CG equivalents. Maybe also typealias Frame
> and Bounds to Rect while we’re at it.
> >> Thoughts?
> > My main thought is that, although I use these types in my iOS and Mac
> apps all the time, I think I've used a rectangle type in web development
> maybe once (when I was generating images). Swift is currently used mainly
> for GUI programming, but most of the domains it's expanding into are ones
> where it doesn't need those types.
> It’s a feature that would be useful in the areas where Swift is being used
> today. Whether a feature is important in other domains doesn’t make it any
> less useful in Swift’s current applications.
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution