<div dir="ltr">I double Nevin on everything he said, especially about incomplete ranges.<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2016-07-26 21:13 GMT+03:00 Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span><br>
on Tue Jul 26 2016, Nevin Brackett-Rozinsky <<a href="http://nevin.brackettrozinsky-AT-gmail.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">nevin.brackettrozinsky-AT-gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> * What is your evaluation of the proposal?<br>
><br>
> “It’s complicated”<br>
><br>
> First, I agree with the prevailing sentiment that the incomplete-range<br>
> portion ought to be separated and postponed.<br>
<br>
</span>FWIW, I don't see any evidence that such a sentiment prevails.<br>
<br>
tail-wagging-the-dog?-ly y'rs,<br>
<span><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
Dave<br>
</font></span><div><div>_______________________________________________<br>
swift-evolution mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>