[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0030 Property Behaviors
dgregor at apple.com
Thu Feb 11 13:05:57 CST 2016
> On Feb 11, 2016, at 2:12 AM, Jonathan Tang <jonathan.d.tang at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution at swift.org>> wrote:
> Hello Swift community,
> The review of SE-0030 "Property Behaviors" begins now and runs through February, 2016. The proposal is available here:
> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0030-property-behavior-decls.md <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/NNNN-proposal.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 <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
> or, if you would like to keep your feedback private, directly to the review manager. When replying, please try to keep the proposal link at the top of the message:
> Proposal link:
> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0030-property-behavior-decls.md <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0030-property-behavior-decls.md>
> Reply text
> Other replies
> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution#what-goes-into-a-review-1>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?
> Would it be out-of-scope to propose extending this to functions? [snip]
I just want to weigh in on this about expansions of the proposal. I think large expansions of the proposal are out-of-scope and should be handled in follow-on discussions, particularly in cases where the proposal is already fairly large. The big exception here is if the feature as proposed doesn’t stand well on its own: for example, it’s not actually useful without some particular expansion, so it shouldn’t be accepted. From reading the rest of your review, I don’t think you believe that expansion to functions is necessary for behaviors to be useful—but that behaviors could be better if they were extended to functions. In that case, I’d call it a follow-on discussion.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution