[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0087: Rename lazy to @lazy
kvasa at icloud.com
Thu May 19 02:25:32 CDT 2016
If lazy becomes @lazy, shouldn't dynamic become @dynamic as well? They both don't change the type as argued in the proposal, it only changes the way the value is accessed.
> On May 19, 2016, at 4:19 AM, Jose Cheyo Jimenez via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> * What is your evaluation of the proposal?
> -1. Too early to optimize this. I would also be opposed to renaming didSet/willSet to lowercased preemptively because of the sake of renaming.
> I think property behaviors should declare their own naming and syntax conventions (and be accepted in a version of Swift) before we start changing these API.
>> * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to Swift?
> No because we do not know what property behaviors would look like for sure.
>> * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?
>> * If you have 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?
> I read this proposal and other mail treads about API that will be affected by property behaviors like didSet/ willSet and lazy
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
More information about the swift-evolution