[swift-evolution] Should we rename "class" when referring to protocol conformance?

Dave Abrahams dabrahams at apple.com
Fri May 13 09:12:55 CDT 2016

on Mon May 09 2016, Matthew Johnson <matthew-AT-anandabits.com> wrote:

>     My claim is that substituting the constraint of “it has value
>     semantics,” while presumably looser than the PureValue constraint, would
>     not compromise the correctness of your view controller, so not only is
>     the meaning of PureValue hard to define, but it doesn't buy you
>     anything.  If you want to refute that, just show me the code.
>         This is not an algorithmic use but is still perfectly valid IMO.
>     If the properties of PureValue matter to your view controller, there's
>     an algorithm somewhere that depends on those properties for its
>     correctness.
> In many cases it may just be view configuration that depends on those
> properties.  I suppose you can call view configuration code an
> algorithm but I think that would fall outside of common usage.

It's an algorithm, or if the configuration is declarative, there's an
algorithm that manipulates it.  That said, I still don't have a concrete
example of how view configuration can depend on these properties.


More information about the swift-evolution mailing list