<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 class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">I’m not sure that this solves anything meaningful (whether in relation to SE-0169 or more generally), does it? What advantage does this provide over just declaring the protocol conformance and those methods as a direct part of the parent type? This seems like it would just introduce more indentation, and more lines of code, for zero benefit.</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""></div></blockquote></div>Well, I'm not overwhelmingly convinced of this whole "we put same-module stuff into extensions" anyways, so it's debatable wether proposals like SE-0169 have any meaningful effects at all… do you think that conformances in same-file extensions have a real benefit? <div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">If nothing else, nested extensions could save those who actually don't care much about such issues from another breaking change in Swift — and imho it adds consistency:</div><div class="">We can nest types, so why can't we nest extensions?</div></body></html>