<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="">How realistic is it to also have a `count` getter? If we can't have `for elem in tuple`, at least that would allow `for i in 0..<tuple.count`.<br class=""><div class="">
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Lucida Grande'; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; display: inline !important; float: none;" class="">Félix</span>
</div>
<br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">Le 11 févr. 2016 à 15:38:07, Chris Lattner <<a href="mailto:clattner@apple.com" class="">clattner@apple.com</a>> a écrit :</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Feb 11, 2016, at 10:59 AM, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div 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=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">On Feb 11, 2016, at 9:12 AM, Félix Cloutier via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="" style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">Hi all,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Since the original fixed-size array thread is somewhat stalling, I forked off the subscript part into this: <a href="https://github.com/zneak/swift-evolution/blob/uniform-tuples/proposals/00nn-collectiontype-for-tuples.md" class="">Treat uniform tuples as collections</a></div></div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">This specific proposal is a non-starter for me, because it lands squarely in the "death valley" of being extremely invasive on the implementation while providing only a small amount of relative value.</div></div></div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div class="">I agree with Doug on this. I still think the right approach is to:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">1) add a subscript on tuples with a consistent element kind.</div><div class="">2) add some type sugar for defining these types</div><div class="">3) consider a convenient form for defining an initializer on these.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">To me, that is the order of priority. Just getting #1 and #2 would seriously move the needle on making C arrays work better, with very little implementation complexity. #3 would be nice, but seems less important.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">-Chris</div><br class=""></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>