<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><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class=""><ul class=""><li class="">Rationalizing base conversion protocol names. I personally don't have the heart to try to re-address the "LiteralConvertible" protocol naming thing again but this would be the last chance to do anything about getting this issue addressed.</li></ul></div></div></blockquote><div>Given the vast amount of bike shedding that has already happened around this topic, I don’t think there is a solution that everyone will be happy with. It is also unclear (to me at least) what solution might be acceptable to the core team. </div><div><br class=""></div><div>At the same time, it continues to bother me that `Convertible` is used by standard library protocols with two completely different meanings. This is a problem that deserves to be solved and as it involves a breaking change Swift 3 is the right timeframe in which to do so.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>If the core team is able to indicate an approach they favor I would be willing to revise and resubmit the proposal. But I don’t want to spend any further time speculating about what solution might be considered acceptable.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Matthew</div></div><br class=""></body></html>