<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>IMO using <span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"> an enum is non-intuitive. A struct is a "bucket of values" and so makes fits with the usage here. If the ability to instantiate the NotificationNames struct is a problem, adding a </span></div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br><div id="AppleMailSignature"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">private init() </span></div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">{</span></div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">}</span></div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">seems more intuitive than co-opting an enum, which has a fairly established use case. </span></div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Your proposal would essentially be adding a keyword that is transformed back into "enum" during compilation. I don't think that a relatively minor improvement in clarity for a fairly small use case is worth adding a language feature.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Allowing structs to be declared as static would be another way of simplifying this kind of declaration, i.e.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">static struct NotificationNames {</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"> let userDataChanged = ...</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"> let recievedAlert = ...</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">}</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">This would allow dropping the private init declaration and dropping the static from each property. I'm not sure I think this shortcut is necessary or even if it's a good idea, but I do think it fits with the language a little better than your current proposal. </span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div></div><div>On Dec 11, 2015, at 04:39, T.J. Usiyan via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>Namespaces</div><div>Author(s): TJ Usiyan</div><div><br></div><div>Introduction</div><div><br></div><div>A `namespace` keyword for swift hold related global variables.</div><div><br></div><div>Motivation</div><div><br></div><div>We often want to collect related variables which do not, for whatever reason, fit neatly into a type provided by Swift. Importing Objective C 'magic strings' as Joshua Sullivan does [here] is one such example. The solution he arrives at is a `struct` type with many type variables and no fields.</div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span></div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span>struct NotificationNames {</div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span> static let userDataChanged = "UserDataChangedNotificationName"</div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span> static let receivedAlert = "ReceivedAlertNotificationName"</div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span> static let peanutButterJellyTime = "ItsPeanutButterJellyTimeNotificationName"</div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span>}</div><div><br></div><div>Users of this API are not meant to create instances of this type, yet it is still possible. A solution to this is to use an `enum` without cases. </div><div><br></div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span>enum NotificationNames {</div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span> static let userDataChanged = "UserDataChangedNotificationName"</div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span> static let receivedAlert = "ReceivedAlertNotificationName"</div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span> static let peanutButterJellyTime = "ItsPeanutButterJellyTimeNotificationName"</div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span>}</div><div><br></div><div>No instances of the `enum` can be made. That this inability to create an instance is intentional is only conveyed via the type system. </div><div><br></div><div>Proposed solution</div><div><br></div><div>Clarity would be greatly improved if we could use `namespace` as a synonym for an enum with no cases. This would allow us to avoid repetition of `static` as well.</div><div><br></div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span>namespace NotificationNames {</div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span> let userDataChanged = "UserDataChangedNotificationName"</div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span> let receivedAlert = "ReceivedAlertNotificationName"</div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span> let peanutButterJellyTime = "ItsPeanutButterJellyTimeNotificationName"</div><div><span class="" style="white-space:pre"> </span>}</div><div><br></div><div>Detailed design</div><div><br></div><div>Namespaces can be represented in the type system as enums. All variables declared in a namespace's scope would be type variables.</div><div><br></div><div>Impact on existing code</div><div><br></div><div>This is an additive change and, as such, should not break any existing code. Though it doesn't matter, this addition could possibly attain ABI compatibility if namespaces are represented as enums without cases.</div><div><br></div><div>Alternatives considered</div><div><br></div><div>Don't implement namespaces. Developers could continue(begin?) using an empty enum to hold type variables.</div></div>
<img src="https://u2002410.ct.sendgrid.net/wf/open?upn=-2Bxb47WeGoqMoAgzLM1ObomDZ33eAoWUyfgnPK0aY0kmOBV0UOL-2F-2FewTnMlFakhgehvwInLhXqOSgLWhWSC59AspLa6GqGYZeh-2BtdIo20WyqWuINj3rtuE9qLd-2BiL4jagc5HtjH2Ce0ulfeDXCmavB061BWZFQBdbt3RewD1Vr7Qm8vt6InljqJC-2FSC7yR9nSfTzLs3qbGWpKpC-2BzjutEtkq79cco-2BGmJif1-2BbbIwACs-3D" alt="" width="1" height="1" border="0" style="height:1px !important;width:1px !important;border-width:0 !important;margin-top:0 !important;margin-bottom:0 !important;margin-right:0 !important;margin-left:0 !important;padding-top:0 !important;padding-bottom:0 !important;padding-right:0 !important;padding-left:0 !important;">
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>swift-evolution mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a></span><br><span><a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>