[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0039 Modernizing Playground Literals

[Erica Sadun]

The literal in the name was:

1. To create an identifier that was long and unique enough to avoid the naming conflict previously experienced with #line for debug identifiers.
2. To clarify the role of the constructor, which is to create a literal playground reference, that can then be copied, dragged, etc within the playground editor.
3. To properly modify the constructor name rather than the argument name.

Other notes:

* There's a consistent use of lowercase identifiers rather than camelCase, which this proposal follows.
* While I personally prefer resourceliteral, fileliteral more closely followed the current art so got preferential mention.
* At some future date, I'd like to see the playground literal vocabulary expand (for example, URL) but that falls outside the scope of this proposal.

-- Erica



> On Mar 7, 2016, at 5:15 PM, Jacob Bandes-Storch via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> 
> +1; quick read.
> 
> Re #fileliteral vs. #resourceliteral, I think the latter makes sense because items are in the "Resources" folder of playgrounds. (The other day I tried referencing a file outside the playground and was confused when dragging it in made a copy.) You might also consider naming the parameter resourceFileName instead of resourceName so it's clear that the file extension is also required (which I assume it is(?)).
> 
> Is it necessary to include "literal" in the name? Isn't the fact that there's special compiler support enough to indicate that it's a literal-like value?
> 
> Jacob
> 
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution at swift.org>> wrote:
> Hello Swift community,
> 
> The review of “ Modernizing Playground Literals” begins now and runs through March 9, 2016. The proposal is available here:
> 
> 	https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0039-playgroundliterals.md <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0039-playgroundliterals.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:
> 
> 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 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 <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md>
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> -Chris
> Review Manager
> 
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution at swift.org>
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160307/2c5e1972/attachment.html>