[swift-evolution] History and future of Swift's parentheses
rjmccall at apple.com
Mon Jun 12 13:52:11 CDT 2017
> On Jun 12, 2017, at 2:36 PM, Jens Persson via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 7:13 PM, Michael Ilseman <milseman at apple.com <mailto:milseman at apple.com>> wrote:
> * Unless you’re proposing a change to the semantics of the language that could affect e.g. name mangling or the type metadata hierarchy, then that would be ABI-affecting. For example, proposing that all functions must only take a single tuple rather than multiple arguments could affect the runtime representation of function types. But even then, there are approaches to mitigate this, so such a proposal would likely present an ABI migration strategy.
> I think I understand (and understood), in very basic terms, the difference between source stability and binary stability, and I was thinking something like this:
> What if there is a chance that the "uniform tuple concept" could be redesigned and reimplemented after all, handling inout, variadic, etc in some way, allowing named single element tuples, allowing A -> B to represent (possibly only "pure") functions with _any_number_ of args, and not just one, as in Swift 4, and so on.
We really do want to tie most of these features specifically to function calls.
> I'm still not entirely sure if this is ABI-affecting or not. But anyway, thank you for your calming words!
> (I will try to not worry that (almost) everything parentheses-related in Swift will forever be stuck in a local optimum, because its current state and the history that lead to it is so confusing that it will stop all attempts at a substantially better solution and only allow minor changes/polishing.)
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution