[swift-evolution] Fwd: about protocols

Reynaldo Aguilar Casajuana rlac1990 at gmail.com
Tue Nov 15 12:51:33 CST 2016

Yes, that would be a classic factory method.
However, what I want is to take advantage of the power of protocol
extensions and use them for improving the way in which dependencies are
resolved in most classic programming languages. The current meaning of
static method/property in protocols, how much useful is it? I even think
that it is a bit ugly to let the user to add a static property directly to
a protocol via an extension, and don't let the user use that static
property via the protocol.

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 1:38 PM, David Waite <david at alkaline-solutions.com>

> A static method or property on a protocol already means something separate
> - that the types which implement that protocol that static method/property.
> I’d recommend moving your factory method to another type or a global
> function?
> -DW
> On Nov 15, 2016, at 10:10 AM, Reynaldo Aguilar Casajuana via
> swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> Hi.
> I was thinking about a simple way of implementing the handling of
> dependencies in swift and arrived to the following solution, however,
> currently it isn't supported in swift. Can we get a way of making this work?
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/40595621/getting-dependen
> cies-using-static-members-in-protocol-in-swift
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161115/6dcb8a9d/attachment.html>

More information about the swift-evolution mailing list