[swift-evolution] [SHORT Review] SE-0132: Rationalizing Sequence end-operation names

[Jose Cheyo Jimenez]

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
> now.
> 
> Sorry,
> 
> -- 
> Dave
> _______________________________________________
> 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...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160726/0bedb1c8/attachment.html>