[swift-evolution] RFC: didset and willset

[Matthew Johnson]

> On May 20, 2016, at 12:41 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote:
> 
> On May 20, 2016, at 7:26 AM, Matthew Johnson <matthew at anandabits.com> wrote:
>>> (For instance, a perhaps controversial opinion: I think `dynamicType` is properly capitalized for the syntactic slot it's in. That's not to say I think we should *keep* `dynamicType`, but simply that `foo.dynamicType` is more appropriate than `foo.dynamictype` would be.)
>> 
>> +1.  'foo.dynamictype' seems strange to me. 
> 
> foo.dynamicType is broken for other reasons.  I see x.dynamicType as being a named operator (like sizeof) and not a property.  For example, we don’t want .dynamicType to show up in code completion on every value in the universe ("4.dynamicType”, really?).
> 
> That argues that it should be spelled as dynamicType(x), and ideally being a standard library feature instead of a keyword.

That makes sense.  It never crossed my mind until now, but given that `sizeof` is a standard library feature why isn’t it camel case `sizeOf`?  Is this a case of “term of the art”? 

> 
> -Chris