[swift-evolution] [Draft] Introducing StaticSelf, an Invariant Self
Matthew Johnson
matthew at anandabits.com
Sat May 14 09:35:12 CDT 2016
> On May 14, 2016, at 12:55 AM, Nicola Salmoria via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>
> Matthew Johnson via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at ...> writes:
>
>> I agree it’s a bit tricky. But that’s better than not possible at all.
> You just need a typealias and a same type constraint to make this work as
> expected / desired:
>>
>>
>> protocol Makable {
>>
>> typealias RootMakable = StaticSelf
>> static func make(value: Int) -> StaticSelf
>> }
>>
>> func makeWithZero<T: Makable where T == T.RootMakable>(x: Int) -> T {
>> return T.make(value: 0) // works now
>> }
>>
>>
>> Now that we have a typealias we can refer to the binding of StaticSelf and
> constrain it as necessary for whatever purpose we have in mind. In some
> cases that will be a same type constraint so that our code works properly
> with class clusters. I don’t have concrete examples of other use cases but
> can imagine use cases constraining the typealias to a protocol, for example.
>
> You can do that today:
>
> protocol Makable {
> associatedtype MadeType
> static func make(value: Int) -> MadeType
> }
>
> func makeWithZero<T: Makable where T == T.MadeType>(x: Int) -> T {
> return T.make(value: 0)
> }
>
> You can't currently constrain MadeType to be the same as the conforming
> type, but, does it matter? What kind of extra guarantees would that give,
> since you need to add the extra constraint anyway in generic code?
Wow, this is pretty cool. Thank you very much for pointing this out Nicola!
I haven’t seen this approach to solving the problem. Given the amount of discussion this problem has received I am surprised nobody has shared this solution yet. I just checked in Xcode 7.3 and it works there. It isn’t dependent on any pre-release features.
Instead of using StaticSelf under the current proposal:
protocol StringInitializable {
static func initializeWith(string: String) -> StaticSelf
}
We just add an associatedtype defaulted to Self:
protocol StringInitializable {
associatedtype Initialized = Self // where Self: Initialized
static func initializeWith(string: String) -> Initialized
}
extension NSURL: StringInitializable {
static func initializeWith(string: String) -> NSURL {
return NSURL()
}
}
func makeWith<T: StringInitializable where T == T.Initialized>(string: String) -> T {
return T.initializeWith(string: string)
}
There are two minor downsides to this approach:
1. You can’t copy and paste the method signature.
2. You can theoretically conform a type completely unrelated to `Initialized` to the protocol, thus violating the semantics.
I think we can live with these downsides. Maybe the `Self: Initialized` will be possible someday. That would be pretty close to StaticSelf. The only difference would be that subclasses still have flexibility to override with their own type.
Now that a reasonable way to do this with existing language features has been identified I will withdraw this proposal. If this approach doesn’t address use cases others have in mind for StaticSelf please speak up!
Doug, if you’re reading this, does the `where Self: Initialized` (i.e. arbitrary subclass constraints) fall into the scope of your “completing generics” manifesto? This is a concrete use case that would utilize subclass constraints.
-Matthew
>
> Nicola
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
More information about the swift-evolution
mailing list