* What is your evaluation of the proposal?
+1. This proposal is a first step for generalized existentials.
-1 for Any<>
+1 for any<>
Reason: any<> is not a generic type and in the order of the type parameters supplied to any<> is not important which is very different from generic argument lists
An alternative might by a completely different syntax not using angled brackets which enclose type parameter lists, e.g. any[P, Q] or Any[P, Q] or P & Q.
The latter makes it difficult to add constraints which are essential for extending this to existentials.
Of course constraints could just be appended, e.g. `P & Q where ...` which might have to be enclosed in parenthesis in some situations.
* Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change to Swift?
Yes. Generalized existentials are very important for Swift and this is an enabler.
\* 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?
Ceylon uses "&" as type operator for type intersections which is effectively the same as any<>, i.e. in Ceylon you would write `P & Q` instead of `any<P, Q>`.
The drawback there is that it might be more difficult to add constraints.
* How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick reading, or an in-depth study?
In depth study and participation in the discussion.