[swift-evolution] [Returned for revision] SE-0117: Default classes to be non-subclassable publicly
laurent.mihalkovic at gmail.com
Fri Jul 15 11:36:47 CDT 2016
> On Jul 15, 2016, at 8:26 AM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>> On Jul 14, 2016, at 10:58 PM, Charles Srstka <cocoadev at charlessoft.com> wrote:
>>> On Jul 14, 2016, at 4:39 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> Or because the framework was developed in the real world, rather than Elysium, and real-world framework developers just about *never* anticipate every single way someone might use their framework (Indeed, if developers were capable of such a thing, there would be no need for third-party software in the first place).
> I’m not sure what you’re trying to say. I agree that it is clearly the case that a framework author cannot anticipate every single use case of their framework.
> However, it is just as clearly the case that “unanticipated subclassability” isn’t a general solution to that problem.
I think seeing it as 'clear' is pure perspective, rather than fact. For instance it might ba apple's perspective, but not red hat's (consider that it took 10 years to be able to delete apps from our devices... indicating that from apple's view point there seems to be a mindset that we cannot do things opportunistically, assuming the consequences of our choices, which does exist in others parts of the technology planet).
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution