[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols

Dave Abrahams dabrahams at apple.com
Sat Jul 2 14:53:10 CDT 2016

on Sat Jul 02 2016, Riley Testut <rileytestut-AT-gmail.com> wrote:

> (My bad, accidentally hit send too early). 
> That, or we could keep either the Convert or Express forms with
> "IntegerLiteralConverting" or "IntegerLiteralExpressing". And if we
> decide "express" really is the best word to describe what happens, I
> personally prefer "IntegerLiteralExpressing" to
> "ExpressibleAsIntegerLiteral", which doesn't feel at home with the
> other Swift protocol names.

It doesn't matter if it “feels at home” if it has the wrong meaning.
It's not that Integer can express an integer literal; It's that an
integer literal can express an Integer.

When naming, we need to learn to stop treating the comfortable ring of
familiar word patterns as an arbiter of success.

> Riley
>> On Jul 2, 2016, at 10:49 AM, Riley Testut <rileytestut at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I kinda agree that these names still aren't the best. FWIW, I much
>> preferred the originals, even if they could be misleading.
>> What if we changed the names to be verbs instead of adjectives? Something like "IntegerLiteralTransforming"?
>>> On Jul 2, 2016, at 10:35 AM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>>> on Sat Jul 02 2016, Anton Zhilin <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>>> -1 from me. I suggest to wait until we get generic protocols
>>>> in Swift 4, then we can use the following:
>>>> protocol From<T> {
>>>>   init(_ from: T)
>>>> }
>>>> And deprecate all the weird Convertibles.
>>> Even if we could do that, “From” would never be an appropriate name for
>>> the ability to express a type as a particular kind of literal.
>>> -- 
>>> -Dave
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> swift-evolution mailing list
>>> swift-evolution at swift.org
>>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution


More information about the swift-evolution mailing list