[swift-evolution] Swift 3 Ranges

[David Hart]

I have the impression we exchanged flexibility for correctness (the ability to represent 0..<Int.max) and that it's wasn't worth the loss of flexibility.1

Or am I missing something?

> On 6 Sep 2016, at 08:15, David Hart via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi people,
> 
> I’ve recently started migrating some Swift 2 projects to Swift 3. I came across the split of Range into Range and ClosedRange and I’ve really struggled with it. Specifically, in Swift 2, I had a struct with a Range property that was initialised in many places with either a closed or open range:
> 
> struct Day { … }
> struct Day : Comparable { … }
> struct Day : Strippable { … }
> 
> struct Info {
>     let name: String
>     let range: Range<Day>
> }
> 
> Info(name: "Christmas Vacation", range: twentyfith...thirtyfirst)
> Info(name: "Summer Vacation", range: someday..<otherday)
> 
> Now, in Swift 3, it seems like we’ve lost a type to represent any range to allow an API client the flexibility to specify it as he wishes. Is there a solution to this problem through a protocol which both ranges conform to, or are we stuck with this because of the new API?
> 
> protocol RangeType {
>     associatedtype Bounds
>     let lowerBound: Bound { get }
>     let upperBound: Bound { get }
>     // what else? not even sure if it is possible to define such a protocol
> }
> 
> David.
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160906/b0a945d6/attachment.html>