[swift-evolution] RFC: didset and willset

[Xiaodi Wu]

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Matthew Johnson via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

>
> > 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”?
>

See: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.swift.evolution/15830/


>
> >
> > -Chris
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160520/a9844eea/attachment.html>