[swift-evolution] [Proposal Draft] Literal Syntax Protocols

[Matthew Johnson]

> On Jun 29, 2016, at 5:04 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon <brent at architechies.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Jun 29, 2016, at 7:41 AM, Matthew Johnson via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> 
>> `Syntax.IntegerLiteralType` is another that popped into my mind this morning.  I don’t recall if that has been mentioned yet.  The idea here is that an integer literal *can be typed as* a type that conforms to this protocol (the type suffix *is not* used in the sense that it used to be used in things like `SequenceType` which had the semantic that conforming types *are* sequences).  
> 
> Throwing my hat in:
> 
> IntegerLiteralCandidate (with or without a Syntax. prefix)
> 
> As in, when you see an integer literal and need to infer its actual type, this type is a candidate.

Thanks Brent.  

For everyone who is bike shedding here - feel free to continue informally.  However, I don’t plan to incorporate every alternative from the bikeshed into the alternatives section unless folks feel it is critical to do so.  I would prefer that everyone save their personal favorite(s) for the review period and continue the bike shedding at that time.  

The proposal already suggests the core team consider modifying the names based on bike shedding during review.  I hope that will be sufficient.

> 
> -- 
> Brent Royal-Gordon
> Architechies
>