[swift-evolution] Revisiting SE-0041 Names
xiaodi.wu at gmail.com
Thu Jun 23 04:00:33 CDT 2016
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 1:26 AM, David Sweeris via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> > On Jun 22, 2016, at 19:35, Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 5:15 PM, David Sweeris <davesweeris at mac.com>
> >> That's a really interesting idea. Is "Syntax" a placeholder, or is that
> the intended name?
> > It is the best name we could come up with, we are open to better
> I guess it depends on the intended semantics of the "namespace". If the
> purpose is to be a container for the various LiteralConvertible protocols,
> then maybe something like `AcceptsLiteralType.Integer` might be better?
> It's a bit wordy, though.
I get what's being aimed at here, but I think the meaning of `Syntax` in
this context is indecipherable. IIUC, the point to be conveyed by the term
is that a literal has no type until it is supplied as an argument to the
initializer and becomes typed. Maybe we could say that the type gives form
to the literal or embodies the literal? Thus maybe a name like
`IntegerLiteralEmbodiment` or `IntegerLiteralManifestation`, maybe even
> >> Also, why an enum? Especially one without any cases...
> > It is not possible to create an instance of an enum that does not have
> > cases. It becomes essentially a namespace.
> Oh that's a clever work-around. I like it :-)
> - Dave Sweeris
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution