[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0101: Rename sizeof and related functions to comply with API Guidelines

[Matthew Johnson]

> 	* What is your evaluation of the proposal?

-1.  I prefer the MemoryLayout struct approach that Dave Abrahams has suggested.  The proposed names retain the  the disadvantage of several top level names and introduce a new disadvantage that they are not directly related to familiar terms of art (sizeof from C, etc).

> 	* Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to Swift?

I don’t think it is a critical change given the current names are related to terms of art.  If we are going to make a change I think it is better to reduce the number of top level names and make the relationship of them clear by making them members of a type.

> 	* Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?

It fits the Swift 3 directive to do any breaking change bike shedding now.  However, the overall direction of Swift is away from top level functions without a compelling reason that a top level function is necessary.  I don’t think these cases are compelling.

> 	* If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?

They break the tie to familiar naming from other languages.

> 	* How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, or an in-depth study?

Participated quite a bit in the initial discussion and read the final proposal.

> 
> More information about the Swift evolution process is available at
> 
> 	https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> -Chris Lattner
> Review Manager
> 
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution