<div dir="ltr">Because semantically they seem more like types unto themselves–which is why I disagree with the lower camel casing but I digress–and the fact that they are static members seems like an implementation detail more than anything else.<div><br></div><div>TJ</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 10:15 PM, Joe Groff <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jgroff@apple.com" target="_blank">jgroff@apple.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=""><br>
> On Apr 4, 2016, at 6:27 PM, T.J. Usiyan via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Is a solution to this actually making the leading dot mean enum lookup, full stop and allowing `Self.foo`? The case that that doesn't cover is static members on a type other than `Self`. I use it to great effect for standard instances of types, so I would appreciate *some* facility to provide that, but it doesn't have to be a leading dot if we can think of a way which is less problematic.<br>
><br>
> I am simply spitballing here but would<br>
> 1 period for enum look up<br>
> 2 periods for static member lookup<br>
><br>
> or something similar be a solution? It doesn't use another character or keyword and it makes it clear which feature is being used.<br>
<br>
</span>I don't see any reason for a split here. Enum cases *are* static members, they just happen to be the ones people encounter most often.<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
-Joe</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>