[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0122: Use colons for subscript declarations
felixcca at yahoo.ca
Wed Jul 20 01:37:19 CDT 2016
> What is your evaluation of the proposal?
I'm not in favor of it because I see no tangible benefit, and it feels like we don't need changes that break source for the sake of breaking source already. I don't think that it's worth the effort.
> Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to Swift?
It's unclear to me that there was a problem in the first place. Saying that the arrow is "very much out of place" seems like a broad exaggeration to me. I'm also not in favor of accessors that throw either, if such a proposal ever comes to light.
> Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?
I'm lukewarm on that one.
> If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?
.NET implements indexers (subscripts) as properties. However, it's a common cause of confusion for people who want to access them using reflection. I agree that subscripts are not "obviously methods", but the .NET experience leads me to believe that they're not "obviously properties" either, so I'm fine with subscripts being their own thing.
> How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, or an in-depth study?
Quick glance, read the whole proposal, didn't look at the discussion very much.
"Named accessors" as presented in the future directions could as well be implemented with the -> syntax for the return type. The biggest differentiating point is "var" instead of "func". This comment isn't meant to endorse or disapprove of named accessors, I'm just saying that we can have it independently of whether we change the syntax.
> Le 19 juil. 2016 à 22:50:37, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> a écrit :
> Hello Swift community,
> The review of "SE-0122: Use colons for subscript declarations " begins now and runs through July 24. The proposal is available here:
> Reviews are an important part of the Swift evolution process. All reviews should be sent to the swift-evolution mailing list at
> or, if you would like to keep your feedback private, directly to the review manager.
> What goes into a review?
> The goal of the review process is to improve the proposal under review through constructive criticism and contribute to the direction of Swift. When writing your review, here are some questions you might want to answer in your review:
> * What is your evaluation of the proposal?
> * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to Swift?
> * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?
> * If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?
> * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, or an in-depth study?
> More information about the Swift evolution process is available at
> Thank you,
> -Chris Lattner
> Review Manager
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution