[swift-evolution] [Discussion] Generic protocols

[Adrian Zubarev]

I believe generic protocols could be used as a shortcut for protocols with associated types.

// Protocol with associated type

protocol Foo {
     
    associatedtype F
    func foo(_ f: F)
}

// Existential
typealias IntFoo = Any<Foo> where F == Int

struct Test : IntFoo {} // error

struct Test : Foo { func foo(_: Int) {…} }

let intFoo: IntFoo = Test() // fine

// SE-0142

protocol IntFooProtocol : Foo where F == Int {}

// Generic protocols
// Autogenerated with all associated types present in the parameter list

protocol GenericFoo<F> : Foo { … }
Instead of creating new protocol for a different subset of types constrained by the where clause, this approach could come really handy.

Does it affect stdlib and/or ABI somehow? When SE–0142 is implemented to improve the stdlib, wouldn’t that mean that more types like IntFooProtocol from above will spawn?



-- 
Adrian Zubarev
Sent with Airmail

Am 3. Dezember 2016 um 13:47:13, Anders Ha (hello at andersio.co) schrieb:

This is called generalized existentials. It is included in the Generic Manifesto, has been discussed quite a few times with long email chains before, and spawned the change to the `protocol<>` syntax as kinda a precursor. It would be surprised if Swift 4 Phase 2 doesn't have it given its popularity.

Regards
Anders

On 2 Dec 2016, at 20:13, Charles Srstka via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

On Dec 2, 2016, at 12:34 PM, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

I just overlooked that the subsection about generic protocols was inside the Unlikely section.

The problem is that I need a way to refer to a function with a specific name. Plus the connection type has to have a specific API, like having a DispatchQueue and know the router object if there is any (sounds like a protocol right?!). The function reference should also keep the connection object alive with a strong reference. 

associatedtype does not solve that problem for me.

I clearly see that generic protocols overlap with associatedtype but couldn’t we find a compromise here? For instance like Chris Lattner introduced generic type aliases without the ability of constants.

Why don’t we just use angle brackets to specify associated types? Protocols aren’t using them for anything anyway. Then you could:

if let someSequence as? Sequence<Iterator.Element == Int> { // do something }

which would form a nice parallel to the syntax for casting things to generic types.

Charles

_______________________________________________
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/20161203/c09dc944/attachment.html>