<div dir="ltr">+1<div>I would also welcome to be able to use "or" and "and" logical operators (not only the not operator) on these constraints.</div><div>I have sometimes generic functions whose code is identical but is written twice: first with 'where T=P1' and then with 'where T=P2', being able to write for instance 'where T=(P1 or P2)' would be very handy IMO.</div><div>One could often argue that additional protocols and extensions could be defined as a workaround to the situation I just mentioned but it seems often a bit of an overkill to me when you only have a couple of functions with that combination of requirements.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Nicolas</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Nicholas Maccharoli via swift-evolution <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"comic sans ms",sans-serif;color:rgb(39,78,19)"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:12.8px">+ 1 </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:12.8px"><span style="font-size:12.8px"> I personally find this frustrating, but at the same time Im curious as to what the argument against </span><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:12.8px">introducing this is. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:12.8px">- Nick </div></div></div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:21 PM, David Sweeris via swift-evolution <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
<br>
<br>
Sent from my iPhone<br>
<span>> On Feb 27, 2017, at 16:34, Rex Fenley via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> I often find myself running into situations where I'll receive "Ambiguous use of..." for overloaded functions or operators. In every case these situations would be easily solved if I could specify "Generic != CertainType" in the where clause of one of the overloads so I can disambiguate the cases. Could this be added to language?<br>
<br>
</span>+ all the 1s, along with something like "where !(T: Foo)"<br>
<br>
IIRC, the topic has come up before, though I couldn't (quickly) find it and don't recall what the response was (other than some variation of "no", since we don't have it).<br>
<br>
- Dave Sweeris<br>
<div class="m_4344788437015756409HOEnZb"><div class="m_4344788437015756409h5"><br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<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/mailma<wbr>n/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div><br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
swift-evolution mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.swift.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/swift-<wbr>evolution</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>