[swift-evolution] [Discussion] Namespaces
dev-null at inode.com
Fri May 20 10:43:33 CDT 2016
>Anyway, I'm +1 for namespaces everywhere, some names can be common.
>For example Node could be related to trees, physics engines and all
>sorts of constructs. "Node" may be a perfectly fine name for these.
>That said, these are sometimes tied to specific types in which case
>nesting them may make more sense, which I believe is already being
>addressed (currently we can't nest generic types)? It's certainly
>not as simple as it can appear!
Absolutely +1 for namespaces.
Even if you despise the concept of namespaces that seems like that
can be addressed by a project and/or company style guide that
explicitly forbids their use.
For the people/projects that would embrace namespaces, namespaces
would be a godsend.
Sure, you can probably pull all kind of stunts to simulate
namespaces, but besides creating additional work for the Swift team
(and I do not say nor take that lightly), they really need to be
supported and implemented at the language/syntax level for first
More information about the swift-evolution