[Accepted] SE-0142: Permit where clauses to constrain associated types


(Douglas Gregor) #1

Proposal Link: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0142-associated-types-constraints.md

Hello Swift Community,

The review of SE-0142 "Permit where clauses to constrain associated types” ran from September 23…30, 2016. Feedback on this proposal was overwhelmingly positive. The proposal is accepted.

  - Doug


(Adrian Zubarev) #2

Accepted for which release? Swift 3.1 or Swift 4.0? Thanks.

···

--
Adrian Zubarev
Sent with Airmail

Am 6. Oktober 2016 um 01:19:54, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution (swift-evolution@swift.org) schrieb:

Proposal Link: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0142-associated-types-constraints.md

Hello Swift Community,

The review of SE-0142 "Permit where clauses to constrain associated types” ran from September 23…30, 2016. Feedback on this proposal was overwhelmingly positive. The proposal is accepted.

- Doug

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution


(Goffredo Marocchi) #3

Not to start an argument, but I am more concerned about how we go about avoiding the Swift 3.0 issue where a bunch of accepted proposals did not make the implementation cut and were not all automatically dragged on the next release, but would have essentially to be discussed and agreed upon again. Please do tell me if I misunderstood something here, I apologise if so.

···

Sent from my iPhone

On 12 Nov 2016, at 08:40, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:

Accepted for which release? Swift 3.1 or Swift 4.0? Thanks.

--
Adrian Zubarev
Sent with Airmail

Am 6. Oktober 2016 um 01:19:54, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution (swift-evolution@swift.org) schrieb:

Proposal Link: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0142-associated-types-constraints.md

Hello Swift Community,

The review of SE-0142 "Permit where clauses to constrain associated types” ran from September 23…30, 2016. Feedback on this proposal was overwhelmingly positive. The proposal is accepted.

- Doug

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution


(Douglas Gregor) #4

Accepted for which release? Swift 3.1 or Swift 4.0? Thanks.

Swift 4.0; if some earlier Swift 3.x picks up these features, we can pull it forward.

  - Doug

···

On Nov 12, 2016, at 12:40 AM, Adrian Zubarev <adrian.zubarev@devandartist.com> wrote:

--
Adrian Zubarev
Sent with Airmail

Am 6. Oktober 2016 um 01:19:54, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution (swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>) schrieb:

Proposal Link: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0142-associated-types-constraints.md

Hello Swift Community,

The review of SE-0142 "Permit where clauses to constrain associated types” ran from September 23…30, 2016. Feedback on this proposal was overwhelmingly positive. The proposal is accepted.

- Doug

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution


(Douglas Gregor) #5

Not to start an argument, but I am more concerned about how we go about avoiding the Swift 3.0 issue where a bunch of accepted proposals did not make the implementation cut

For this *specific* feature, the implementation is well underway, so I’m not concerned about it not making Swift 4.
In general, we’re trying to focus Swift 4 more narrowly (as Chris noted in https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mon-20160725/025676.html) so we’re less likely to review & accept something that won’t actually get implemented.

and were not all automatically dragged on the next release, but would have essentially to be discussed and agreed upon again. Please do tell me if I misunderstood something here, I apologise if so.

The core team talked about this a bit recently. I’m working on a more comprehensive write-up, but most of the proposals in this category are additive and can be rolled forward.

  - Doug

···

On Oct 6, 2016, at 1:09 AM, Goffredo Marocchi <panajev@gmail.com> wrote:

Sent from my iPhone

On 12 Nov 2016, at 08:40, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote:

Accepted for which release? Swift 3.1 or Swift 4.0? Thanks.

--
Adrian Zubarev
Sent with Airmail

Am 6. Oktober 2016 um 01:19:54, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution (swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>) schrieb:

Proposal Link: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0142-associated-types-constraints.md

Hello Swift Community,

The review of SE-0142 "Permit where clauses to constrain associated types” ran from September 23…30, 2016. Feedback on this proposal was overwhelmingly positive. The proposal is accepted.

- Doug

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution


(Goffredo Marocchi) #6

Thank you Doug, much appreciated response :slight_smile:

···

Sent from my iPhone

On 6 Oct 2016, at 17:46, Douglas Gregor <dgregor@apple.com> wrote:

On Oct 6, 2016, at 1:09 AM, Goffredo Marocchi <panajev@gmail.com> wrote:

Not to start an argument, but I am more concerned about how we go about avoiding the Swift 3.0 issue where a bunch of accepted proposals did not make the implementation cut

For this *specific* feature, the implementation is well underway, so I’m not concerned about it not making Swift 4.
In general, we’re trying to focus Swift 4 more narrowly (as Chris noted in https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mon-20160725/025676.html) so we’re less likely to review & accept something that won’t actually get implemented.

and were not all automatically dragged on the next release, but would have essentially to be discussed and agreed upon again. Please do tell me if I misunderstood something here, I apologise if so.

The core team talked about this a bit recently. I’m working on a more comprehensive write-up, but most of the proposals in this category are additive and can be rolled forward.

  - Doug

Sent from my iPhone

On 12 Nov 2016, at 08:40, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:

Accepted for which release? Swift 3.1 or Swift 4.0? Thanks.

--
Adrian Zubarev
Sent with Airmail

Am 6. Oktober 2016 um 01:19:54, Douglas Gregor via swift-evolution (swift-evolution@swift.org) schrieb:

Proposal Link: https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0142-associated-types-constraints.md

Hello Swift Community,

The review of SE-0142 "Permit where clauses to constrain associated types” ran from September 23…30, 2016. Feedback on this proposal was overwhelmingly positive. The proposal is accepted.

- Doug

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution