[swift-evolution] [SHORT Review] SE-0132: Rationalizing Sequence end-operation names
Jose Cheyo Jimenez
cheyo at masters3d.com
Tue Jul 26 17:51:35 CDT 2016
I think we are missing some sort of diff to show the impact of this proposal similar to what we had for the “grand renaming"
> On Jul 26, 2016, at 1:23 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> on Tue Jul 26 2016, Anton Zhilin <antonyzhilin-AT-gmail.com <http://antonyzhilin-at-gmail.com/>> wrote:
>> I double Nevin on everything he said, especially about incomplete ranges.
>> 2016-07-26 21:13 GMT+03:00 Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution <
>> swift-evolution at swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution at swift.org>>:
>>> on Tue Jul 26 2016, Nevin Brackett-Rozinsky <
>>> nevin.brackettrozinsky-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> * What is your evaluation of the proposal?
>>>> “It’s complicated”
>>>> First, I agree with the prevailing sentiment that the incomplete-range
>>>> portion ought to be separated and postponed.
>>> FWIW, I don't see any evidence that such a sentiment prevails.
>>> tail-wagging-the-dog?-ly y'rs,
> Looks like I had missed some messages in the thread. I see the evidence
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution at swift.org>
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution