[swift-evolution] [swift-evolution-announce] [Review] SE-0095: Replace `protocol<P1, P2>` syntax with `P1 & P2`

[Jordan Rose]

> On Jun 23, 2016, at 22:20, L. Mihalkovic <laurent.mihalkovic at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Regards
> LM
> (From mobile)
> On Jun 24, 2016, at 5:55 AM, Jordan Rose via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution at swift.org>> wrote:
> 
>> [Proposal: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0095-any-as-existential.md <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0095-any-as-existential.md> ]
>> 
>> I’ve gone on record before as against this syntax, although when I set out earlier today to record my usual rebuttal I found that it really was mostly a matter of taste. Yes, this looks weird to me:
>> 
>> let callback: (Data) -> NSCoding & NSCopying
>> 
>> but I’m sure the infix ‘->’ for functions looked weird to everyone the first time they saw it as well, and it really is pretty clear in argument position.
>> 
>> However, I did remember one issue, which was brought up on the previous mega-thread: if we do want to generalize protocol values <https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/docs/GenericsManifesto.md#generalized-existentials>, we’re going to want something that’s essentially “a type with a ‘where’ clauses in it”. I really don’t want to force people to use a typealias to spell such a type, but at the same time I want that where clause to be clearly attached to the type. (As brought up before the return position of a function is currently ambiguous with SE-0081 <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0081-move-where-expression.md>.)
>> 
>> Despite the lightweightedness and the well-prepared proposal by Adrian and Austin, the lack of bracketing <> () {} [] leads me to maintain my stance against the proposed syntax.
> 
> This is another way to generalize P&Q compositions that opens another way to specify WHERE
> 
> https://gist.github.com/lmihalkovic/68c321ea7ffe27e553e37b794309b051 <https://gist.github.com/lmihalkovic/68c321ea7ffe27e553e37b794309b051>
Thanks for bringing this up. I know one reason we’ve avoided syntax like this in the past is the potential for static subscripts, but of course that’s just one of many future concerns.

Jordan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160624/4ae37db8/attachment.html>