<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=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">On Sep 20, 2016, at 10:56 AM, Vladimir.S via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br class=""></blockquote><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; 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="">Then, shouldn't we disallow protocol conformance 'in-place' in type's definition? So, if you need to conform to protocol - only extension is the syntax for this. In this case I can understand the idea. Otherwise - can't.</span></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">You can’t completely restrict protocol conformance to extensions, because extensions can’t contained stored properties. Thus, to satisfy a protocol requirement with a stored property, it must be placed in the type’s definition.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Charles</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></body></html>