<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">The rationale is the same - the design of Swift really wants operators and identifiers to be partitioned into different namespaces. Violating that would make it impossible to parse a swift file without parsing all of its imports. This is a mistake that C made (you have to parse all the headers a file uses to reliably parse the file) that we don’t want to replicate in Swift.</div></blockquote></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div>Thanks Chris. I now understand the reasoning for separating the two groups. I don’t have a background in language creation, so whatever I can learn from these email lists is awesome. I have already gained a ton of knowledge following these conversations.<div class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Alternative: Reserve one of the operator characters as an operator introducer. Everything from that character to the next whitespace is an operator name. This would allow non-operator characters in operator names while still preserving the strict operator/identifier separation.<br class=""><br class=""> // • is the operator introducer character<br class=""> infix operator •times …<br class=""> infix operator •mod …<br class=""> x = a •times b •mod 8<br class=""><br class="">Limitations:<br class="">You still can't use an unadorned word as an operator name.<br class="">You can't use such an operator without whitespace (unlike operators whose names use operator characters only). </blockquote></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Oooooo … that is a very cool alternative Greg. Honestly went into this proposal thinking there was no possibility, but now I have a glimmer of hope.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Using “•” (option + 8 on keyboard) would be great since it is accessible through key combo, but isn’t widely used in normal expressions.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">What is needed to prove worth of such a feature to be added?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div apple-content-edited="true" class="">
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class=""><font color="#8d8d8d" class=""><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Nerd . Designer . Developer</font></span><font color="#464646" class=""><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">Jo Albright</span></font><br class=""></div><br class=""></div></div></body></html>