[swift-evolution] Proposal: Contiguous Variables (A.K.A. Fixed Sized Array Type)
felixcca at yahoo.ca
Thu Jan 28 16:59:41 CST 2016
I think that a (4 * Int) syntax or equivalent for uniform tuples and making them subscriptable would be very helpful when dealing with C APIs that export structures with arrays in them.
> Le 28 janv. 2016 à 17:46:40, Joe Groff via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> a écrit :
>> On Jan 28, 2016, at 2:40 PM, Jacob Bandes-Storch <jtbandes at gmail.com <mailto:jtbandes at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> What is a "type-level integer expression"? The only thing I can think of is allowing numeric parameters to generics, like "Tuple<4, Int>", but I don't think that's what you're talking about.
> That's what I mean, yeah. If we allow integers as type parameters, you'd conceivably want to use integer literals and expressions in this position too.
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Joe Groff <jgroff at apple.com <mailto:jgroff at apple.com>> wrote:
>> > On Jan 28, 2016, at 2:37 PM, Joe Groff <jgroff at apple.com <mailto:jgroff at apple.com>> wrote:
>> >> On Jan 28, 2016, at 2:36 PM, Jacob Bandes-Storch <jtbandes at gmail.com <mailto:jtbandes at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >> I like this idea, but the syntax seems dangerously close to a call site for "func *(lhs: Int, rhs: Any.Type)" (which is obviously ill-advised, but it is allowed).
>> >> Maybe we could take advantage of something which would be very invalid under the current grammar, namely (n T) rather than (n * T):
>> >> let values: (4 Int) = (1, 2, 3, 4)
>> Bare juxtaposition might be problematic if we ever do introduce type-level integer expressions, though.
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution