[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0115: Rename Literal Syntax Protocols
nevin.brackettrozinsky at gmail.com
Sun Jul 3 14:51:38 CDT 2016
How about Syntax.IntegerLiteralDestination as a name?
That way just as, for example, CustomStringConvertible can be read to mean
“This type can be converted to a string in a custom manner”, we would have
Syntax.IntegerLiteralDestination meaning “This type can be the destination
for a literal integer in syntax.”
That said, I think Syntax.IntegerLiteral is sufficient. “This type can be a
literal integer in syntax.”
On Sunday, July 3, 2016, David Sweeris via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> > On Jul 2, 2016, at 23:16, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution <
> > Change it to "Syntax.ExpressibleByIntegerLiteral" and I'd be onboard but
> > I don't think it would pass the DaveTest despite it being only 2
> characters longer.
> Yeah, I agree with "By" instead of "As". It makes it a bit clearer that
> these protocols kinda work backwards, so to speak. That is, if I understand
> things correctly, rather than adding functionality/semantics to the
> conforming type, conforming to a literal protocol adds
> functionality/semantics to the corresponding literal "type" (which we can't
> directly interact with because they don't actually exist within Swift's
> type system).
> - Dave Sweeris
> swift-evolution mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution