[swift-evolution] [Proposal] Allow Static Function Properties to Satisfy Static Function Protocol Requirements
clattner at apple.com
Mon Jul 11 17:43:14 CDT 2016
> On Jul 11, 2016, at 3:39 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> On Jul 10, 2016, at 1:33 PM, Jasdev Singh via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution at swift.org>> wrote:
>> Hey Swift Evolution!
>> Drafted up a small proposal that harmonizes the use of static functions and static function properties in appropriate protocol conformance scenarios:
>> https://github.com/Jasdev/swift-evolution/blob/static-func-static-var/proposals/XXXX-static-func-and-static-var-func-protocol-conformance.md <https://github.com/Jasdev/swift-evolution/blob/static-func-static-var/proposals/XXXX-static-func-and-static-var-func-protocol-conformance.md>
>> Would love any feedback or edge cases I may have missed!
> This is an additive proposal, thus out of scope for Swift 3.
> Beyond that, as someone downthread mentioned, the major thing missing here is a strong motivation for *why* we should do this. You say only "we see that the protocol requirements and conformances are actually equivalent and should both be valid.” but adding redundant ways to say the same thing motivation.
I meant: "but adding redundant ways to say the same thing is not a motivation.”
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution