[swift-evolution] [Pitch] Renaming sizeof, sizeofValue, strideof, strideofValue
matthew at anandabits.com
Thu Jun 2 07:50:56 CDT 2016
Sent from my iPad
> On Jun 2, 2016, at 12:05 AM, Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Xiaodi Wu <xiaodi.wu at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 11:28 PM, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>> Upon accepting SE-0098, the core team renamed the proposed stdlib function from dynamicType() to type(of:). They write, "The core team recognizes that this means that we should probably resyntax the existing sizeof/strideof functions, but that should be a follow-on discussion."
>>> Follow on discussion started. Have at it.
>> See: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.swift.evolution/15830
> To summarize the previous discussion:
> 1. Per Joe Groff, although sizeof() and friends are treated as terms-of-art, these names were lifted straight from C and do not correspond to anything named "sizeof" in LLVM.
> 2. There are issues with using a name such as stride(of:), because stride(...) already means something else in the stdlib; moreover, size(of:) isn't the best name for something that doesn't do what its C namesake does; therefore, larger changes to the naming were suggested.
> 2. Dave A. and others expressed the opinion that these should probably not be global functions; his preference was for:
> MemoryLayout<T>.size // currently sizeof()
> MemoryLayout<T>.spacing // currently strideof()
> MemoryLayout<T>.alignment // currently alignof()
Thanks for the summary. I missed the original thread.
I think I like this approach despite its verbosity. Will give it a little bit more thought...
> 3. Dave A. proposed that sizeofValue(), strideofValue(), and alignofValue() are better off removed altogether. I don't know if people are going to be happy about this idea.
> * * *
> If we take inspiration from type(of:), then it's actually sizeofValue(), etc., that should be renamed size(of:), etc. Also, a fun tidbit is that what's currently called sizeof(), etc.--the ones that take types rather than values--are actually not very good candidates for having parameter labels, because it's OK to write `sizeof(Int)`, but one must currently write `size(of: Int.self)` when the function has a label.
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution