[swift-evolution] [Idea] Extend "required" to methods other than init()

Nate Birkholz nbirkholz at gmail.com
Thu Jan 14 19:36:52 CST 2016

Having trouble locating it, any help, anyone?

On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Andrey Tarantsov <andrey at tarantsov.com>

> Hey, and welcome!
> We actually talked about it some time before Christmas, with possible
> names like @must_override. The talks seemed to be going well, but I haven't
> been following the discussion closely, so cannot provide a summary or
> status, unfortunately. Please try to find it in the archives.
> A.
> On Jan 15, 2016, at 6:38 AM, Nate Birkholz via swift-evolution <
> swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> My first ever post on this list or any open source project, sorry if I'm
> not following  procedure accurately, here.
> Currently, the "required" keyword on an initializer causes subclasses to
> implement their own init methods in place of the so-marked initializer. I
> propose extending the use of the required keyword to methods such that when
> a new subclass is created, it must create its own unique implementation of
> the method, or at ;east explicitly invoke the superclass implementation via
> super.methodName()
> Requiring child classes to implement the method will improve the
> maintainability of codebases over time and is a logical extension of the
> current implementation on initialization. This will provide a useful,
> nondisruptive, nonbreaking communication tool.
> --
> Nate Birkholz
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Nate Birkholz
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160114/f556c309/attachment.html>

More information about the swift-evolution mailing list