<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 09 May 2016, at 00:38, Austin Zheng <<a href="mailto:austinzheng@gmail.com" class="">austinzheng@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: 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="">Is the plan to eventually support "multiple" forms of concrete same-type requirement syntax - the existing "where Element == SomeConcreteType" and the generic parameterized extensions described elsewhere? If not, the syntax should probably be discussed as part of a pre-proposal thread before anything else happens.</span></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">The way modifications have gone through swift-evolution, it seems like it would be more logical to implement it with no syntax change first and only then propose and discuss generic parameterised extensions.</div></body></html>