<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Aug 2, 2017, at 10:48 PM, David Hart <<a href="mailto:david@hartbit.com" class="">david@hartbit.com</a>> wrote:</div><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; 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="">Somewhat related: I have a similar problem in a project where I need two different Codable conformances for a type: one for coding/decoding from/to JSON, and another one for coding/decoding from/to a database row. The keys and formatting are not identical. The only solution around that for now is separate types, which can be sub-optimal from a performance point of view.</span></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">Actually if the wrapper types are structs with a single field, their use should not introduce any additional overhead at runtime.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Slava</div></body></html>