* What is your evaluation of the proposal?
+1. This is a good solution. Would like to see the class thing fixed, but that can be another proposal.
* Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to Swift?
Yes. Having to declare these inside protocols, but implement outside of the conforming type was very confusing.
* Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?
Yes.
* If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?
N/A
* How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, or an in-depth study?
Read the proposal and some of the discussion.
Thanks,
Jon
ยทยทยท
Hello Swift community,
The second review of "SE-0091: Improving operator requirements in protocols" begins now and runs through July 12. The proposal is available here:
Reviews are an important part of the Swift evolution process. All reviews should be sent to the swift-evolution mailing list at:
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
or, if you would like to keep your feedback private, directly to the review manager.
What goes into a review?
The goal of the review process is to improve the proposal under review through constructive criticism and contribute to the direction of Swift. When writing your review, here are some questions you might want to answer in your review:
* What is your evaluation of the proposal?
* Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to Swift?
* Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?
* If you have used other languages or libraries with a similar feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?
* How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, or an in-depth study?More information about the Swift evolution process is available at
https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md
Thank you,
-Chris Lattner
Review Manager