Existential `any` does not seem to be required in Swift 6 mode

[lawrence-forooghian]

My understanding from SE-0335 was that using a protocol as a variable’s type without writing any would be an error in Swift 6 mode, but this doesn't match what I’m seeing.

For example, in Xcode 16 beta 6, the evolution proposal’s example that demonstrates things that should be an error in Swift 6 seems to be compiling fine for me.

Have I misunderstood something?

[vns]

Can’t find post on the topic (I think it dates early 2024), but it was decided to postpone turning on required any for later.

[Jumhyn (Frederick Kellison-Linn)]

You’ve not misunderstood, just missed the update that @vns mentioned!

@hborla

Given the concerns about migration to consistent use of existential any in the language, and the expectation that additional language improvements will be coming that might affect the end result of that migration, the Language Steering Group is deferring the source-incompatible changes in SE-0335 to a future language revision.

[lawrence-forooghian]

Thanks both!

[hborla (Holly Borla)]

@lawrence-forooghian

For example, in Xcode 16 beta 6, the evolution proposal’s example that demonstrates things that should be an error in Swift 6 seems to be compiling fine for me.

Thank you for the reminder that I need to update the proposal to reflect the update

[wangchao21 (WangChao)]

In Xcode16.2, I found a strange issue:
If 'P' is defined in different module, we must add 'any' in 'bar';
If they are defined in the same file, it's ok to omit 'any'.
I don't known why?

protocol P {}

func bar(_ p: P) {}