[swift-evolution] Proposal: Split extensions into implementing methods and adding static functions Was: [swift-evolution-announce] [Review] SE-0164: Remove final support in protocol extensions

Howard Lovatt howard.lovatt at gmail.com
Wed May 3 03:19:34 CDT 2017


What aspects of the current proposal do you have reservations about?

  -- Howard.

On 3 May 2017 at 18:09, Brent Royal-Gordon <brent at architechies.com> wrote:

> On May 3, 2017, at 12:25 AM, Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution <
> swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> I definitely agree that it's a feature that _can_ be used unwisely, but
> the fact remains that it _is_ used pervasively in the standard library, and
> deliberately
> I'm not so sure that's true. Which standard library protocols
> intentionally depend upon certain parts to not be overridable? Are they so
> pervasive that we wouldn't prefer to just mark those members that need it
> with a `final` keyword? If John McCall woke up tomorrow with some genius
> idea of how to make extension methods overridable with zero overhead, would
> we choose to keep the current design?
> That's not to say the proposal at hand is a good idea, but I think you're
> overselling the current design.
> --
> Brent Royal-Gordon
> Architechies
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20170503/fc8a71af/attachment.html>

More information about the swift-evolution mailing list