[swift-evolution] [Discussion] Generic protocols
Adrian Zubarev
adrian.zubarev at devandartist.com
Mon Dec 5 13:45:51 CST 2016
Syntactic sugar could only solve the first issue because it would create a generic type that allows you to reuse your protocol with associated types in a way like ConstructibleFromValue<Float> would.
The idea is simple, but there are a few disadvantages that makes it less worth to implement.
If I should describe it in a different way, I’d prefer something like this instead:
typealias GenericCollection<E> = Collection where Iterator.Index == Int, Element == E
//====================================//
protocol ConstructibleFromValue {
associatedtype ValueType
init(_ value: ValueType)
}
typealias ConstructibleFrom<V> = ConstructibleFromValue where ValueType == V
// In both cases I want to be able to conform to this macro/shortcut.
// I don't speak about existentials here.
protocol MyType {}
extension MyType : ConstructibleFrom<Float> {
init(_ value: Float) { ... }
}
extension MyType : ConstructibleFrom<Double> {
init(_ value: Double) { ... }
}
--
Adrian Zubarev
Sent with Airmail
Am 3. Dezember 2016 um 21:21:23, Xiaodi Wu (xiaodi.wu at gmail.com) schrieb:
I'm not sure I understand. The first feature in the generics manifesto is parameterized protocols so that you can have, say, ConstructibleFrom<Float> and ConstructibleFrom<Int> and the ability to conform to the same protocol in two ways. The second feature is explained as a request for generalized existentials. I don't understand how syntactic sugar solves either issue.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20161205/3d4cc2b9/attachment.html>
More information about the swift-evolution
mailing list