[swift-evolution] [Pitch] Requiring proactive overrides for default protocol implementations.

[Howard Lovatt]

It is a good idea to explicitly document the behaviour that this
requirement for override is a compile time check only and does not mean
that already compiled code has to be recompiled to allow a protocol to be
retroactively fitted to an already compiled type.

On Friday, 29 April 2016, Matthew Johnson via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Apr 28, 2016, at 5:49 PM, Erica Sadun <erica at ericasadun.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','erica at ericasadun.com');>> wrote:
>
>
> On Apr 28, 2016, at 12:18 PM, Matthew Johnson <matthew at anandabits.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','matthew at anandabits.com');>> wrote:
> We can't add the keywords if the structs are defined in a module we import
> but don't own.  We are only declaring the conformance retroactively.  The
> ability to do this is a crucial aspect of generic programming.  It isn't
> yet clear how your proposal handles retroactive modeling.
>
>
> These are compile-time checks and should not affect compiled code.
>
>
> Does that mean the conformance declaration will be accepted by the
> compiler under your proposal?  I would really like to see this called out
> explicitly in the proposal.
>
>
> -- E
>
>

-- 
-- Howard.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160429/1e28dd94/attachment.html>