# Protocol conformance and \`Optional\`s

**URL:** <https://forums.swift.org/t/protocol-conformance-and-optional-s/30976>\
**Category:** Using Swift\
**Tags:** optional, protocols\
**Created:** [November 20, 2019, 10:18pm UTC](https://forums.swift.org/t/protocol-conformance-and-optional-s/30976 "2019-11-20T22:18:55Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![technicated](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/swift/user_avatar/forums.swift.org/technicated/32/5420_2.png) [@technicated](https://forums.swift.org/u/technicated)\
**Post date:** [November 20, 2019, 10:39pm UTC](https://forums.swift.org/t/protocol-conformance-and-optional-s/30976/5 "2019-11-20T22:39:29Z")

</div>

@DevAndArtist that's very interesting! And this "trick" works even today, five years later.

@jonprescott yes but the protocol property is a get-only one, so I expect a non-optional implementation to work just fine! Because it seems that a similar rule is already in place for initialisers (look at DevAndArtist's [link](https://forums.swift.org/t/how-does-this-rule-work-in-regard-of-ambiguity/19448/2)).

---

_[View the full topic](https://forums.swift.org/t/protocol-conformance-and-optional-s/30976)._