[swift-evolution] [Draft] Unify "import Darwin/Glibc" to simply "Libc"
jeremy.j.pereira at googlemail.com
Thu Oct 6 05:38:51 CDT 2016
> On 6 Oct 2016, at 03:08, Greg Parker via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> On Oct 5, 2016, at 6:38 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> Now, as for naming: I like using the leading "C" convention ("CLibc") because it leaves us room for introducing an overlaid version of the module in the future without breaking source compatibility. Because of this, I wouldn't want to name the module just `C`, because it wouldn't leave room for a Swifty version later.
> I don't think separating the raw C library translation from the pretty Swift wrapper works, at least not for everybody. The problem is that the raw translation is going to have functions that the pretty wrapper does not.
> (Perhaps the pretty wrapper is new and incomplete. Perhaps an OS has added functions and the pretty wrapper has not caught up yet.)
Surely you have just outlined the reason why the ability to import the raw C library is absolutely essential.
> If you try to import both then you end up with the same problems of name collisions today and source incompatibility in the future when the pretty wrapper grows.
To me this reads like you are claiming we can’t have the full capability of a C library now because one day in the future it *might* cause a problem.
More information about the swift-evolution