[swift-evolution] [Pitch] Array full proposal

[Robert Widmann]

I think this proposal is trying to do too much at once.  Correct me if I’m wrong, but you’re proposing

1) New sugar for fixed-length arrays without a corresponding stdlib declaration
2) Arity and type inference for literals
3) Default initialization semantics for arrays including a DI exception for fixed-length arrays that aren’t fully initialized 
4) 2 new attribute declarations for unspecified concurrency semantics
5) A magical compiler intrinsic that declares loop counters
6) Static collection subtyping constraints referencing convertibility constraints we don’t currently have
7) Tuple conversions

I believe your aims are noble, and this is certainly a tremendously important problem we need to solve, but I think there needs to be a measured response to the current state of things.

~Robert Widmann

> On Jul 10, 2017, at 9:54 PM, Daryle Walker via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> 
> Spent the past week coming up with a full proposal for fixed-size arrays. I wrote it mainly from the bottom upwards. There may be some inconsistencies. And I'm not entirely sure what "structural sub-typing" means, or if it's appropriate for arrays.
> 
> <https://gist.github.com/CTMacUser/cfffa526b971d0e1f3a079f53c6819bb <https://gist.github.com/CTMacUser/cfffa526b971d0e1f3a079f53c6819bb#file-nnnn-fixed-size-arrays-md>>
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170712/3c9b0beb/attachment.html>