<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div><br>+1 for the proposal, and +1 for Nate's syntax.</div><div>On Jan 28, 2016, at 19:36, Nate Birkholz via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><div>What about "(n of Type)"?<br><br>Sent from my iPhone, please excuse brevity and errors</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>That is currently true, but it might not always be the case. In principle it's possible to write a compile-time function (I think "macro" is the word I'm looking for) that operates solely on types, rather than values, and could be evaluated at compile time. Why adopt a syntax that's likely to conflict with a commonly requested feature?<br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div>On Jan 28, 2016, at 7:32 PM, Félix Cloutier via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8">[...] Operators can't appear inside a type, so I don't think that it would be a problem to reuse * there either.</div></blockquote></div></blockquote><br><div>- Dave Sweeris</div></body></html>