[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0070: Make Optional Requirements Objective-C only

Brent Royal-Gordon brent at architechies.com
Tue Apr 26 00:15:19 CDT 2016

> 	* What is your evaluation of the proposal?

I think this proposed solution doesn't really address the problem. An @objcOptional keyword is intended to make it clear that the feature is fundamentally, intrinsically, for Objective-C compatibility. Separating the keywords doesn't do that; it still seems like an arbitrary and temporary limitation.

@objcOptional *does* make it clear that this is a compatibility feature. So would @objc(optional), although that would conflict with the @objc(selectorGoesHere) syntax.

> 	* 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?

I think it's neutral to the direction of Swift.

> 	* If you have you 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?

Participated in the previous discussion, read this one pretty quickly.

Brent Royal-Gordon

More information about the swift-evolution mailing list