[swift-evolution] [Draft] Unify "import Darwin/Glibc" to simply "Libc"

[Xiaodi Wu]

On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 6:14 PM, David Waite via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

> If we are pulling in functions/structures not defined by the C standard
> library or by POSIX, I’d be reluctant to support a standard name. It would
> be troublesome if someone thought that they were cross-platform but turned
> out to use strfry() heavily
>
> I certainly wonder what people specifically want to bring the C standard
> library or POSIX libraries in for - is it compatibility with third party
> libraries? Functionality missing in Foundation?
>

To throw one use case out there, it's used extensively in
corelibs-foundation itself.


> -DW
>
> > On Oct 5, 2016, at 4:57 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution <
> swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sep 13, 2016, at 12:29 PM, Brian Gesiak via swift-evolution <
> swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> I hadn't thought about a unified overlay for POSIX. I think the
> simplified import alone has benefit to warrant its own evolution proposal.
> Would it be possible to have a separate discussion for the POSIX overlay
> idea? Or is there a reason that I'm missing that prevents the import from
> being viable on its own? (Apologies in advance if there's an obvious answer
> to this question!)
> >
> > I've heard the argument before that we should do a full overlay, but I
> think this is becoming a case of the perfect being the enemy of the good.
> Having some sort of "just import whatever the system libc is called" module
> would be a significant improvement in practice over the state of the art,
> even if we don't do any other adaptation.
> >
> > Here's what I would suggest. We have a convention for exposing "raw"
> imports of C libraries: you call them `C\(libraryName)`. So I would suggest
> we introduce a `CLibc` module which provides a raw import of the system's
> libc. If we later decide to do a full-featured overlay, that's great—we can
> call it `Libc`. But `CLibc` by itself would be an improvement over the
> status quo and a step in the right direction.
> >
> > --
> > Brent Royal-Gordon
> > Architechies
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > swift-evolution mailing list
> > swift-evolution at swift.org
> > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161005/ecad9e6f/attachment.html>