The second review of SE-0077, "Improved operator declarations" ran from June 29 ... July 4, 2016. The proposal has been *accepted* with minor revisions. This round of feedback focused on naming, both of the attributes for precedence groups and the conventions to use for naming the groups themselves:
- The community expressed a strong preference for 'higherThan' and 'lowerThan' precedence relationships over the previously-proposed 'strongerThan' and 'weakerThan', and the core team *agrees* that these are better terms of art. The proposal is accepted with these terms revised.
- The standard library team reviewed the proposed names for the standard precedence groups, and suggests the following minor naming revisions:
establishing a convention of <Noun>Precedence for precedence group names. The core team accepts the proposal with these revised standard precedence names.
Thanks Anton for shepherding this proposal through the review process!
The syntax we ended up with is not really perfect from my point of view,
but I assume that core team knows what they are doing :P
But I still wonder if discussion on standard precedence groups is possible
before Swift 3.
It does not require any implementation: if we settle on something, we will
just need to modify Swift source where precedence groups are located.
ยทยทยท
2016-07-08 1:42 GMT+03:00 Joe Groff via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org>:
The second review of SE-0077, "Improved operator declarations" ran from
June 29 ... July 4, 2016. The proposal has been **accepted** with minor
revisions. This round of feedback focused on naming, both of the attributes
for precedence groups and the conventions to use for naming the groups
themselves:
- The community expressed a strong preference for 'higherThan' and
'lowerThan' precedence relationships over the previously-proposed
'strongerThan' and 'weakerThan', and the core team **agrees** that these
are better terms of art. The proposal is accepted with these terms revised.
- The standard library team reviewed the proposed names for the standard
precedence groups, and suggests the following minor naming revisions:
establishing a convention of <Noun>Precedence for precedence group names.
The core team accepts the proposal with these revised standard precedence
names.
Thanks Anton for shepherding this proposal through the review process!