[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0041: Updating Protocol Naming Conventions for Conversions

[Matthew Johnson]

Sent from my iPad

On May 10, 2016, at 5:56 PM, David Hart via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

>>    * What is your evaluation of the proposal?
> 
> +1 for the idea of making the naming consistent
> -1 for the actual chosen names
> 
> Even after reading the reasoning behind the choice of those words, it took me a time to scratch my head around it. It’s definitely not immediately obvious that Convertible is bi-directional.
> 
> I would have preferred something much more obvious (even if less grammatically correct):
> 
> -InputProtocol
> -OutputProtocol
> -InputOutputProtocol or BidirectionalProtocol
> 
> Or:
> 
> -Inputable
> -Outputable (got that from Haskell)
> -InputOutputable or -Bidirectionalable

Thanks for your feedback.

To be honest, I'm not a fan of the names you suggest.  Erica had a similar variation using To, From, and ToAndFrom prefixes that I find preferable to your suggestions if we were to go in this direction.  That said, I think the names in our proposal feel more Swifty.

> 
>>    * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to Swift?
> 
> Yes.
> 
>>    * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?
> 
> Yes for the idea of making them consistent, no for the names.
> 
>>    * If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?
> 
> Haskell uses Outputable.
> 
>>    * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, or an in-depth study?
> 
> Read the proposal several times.
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution