I really don't see the issue with variadic generics, in all honesty, maybe I just don't understand what the point @Torust was saying. We don't know what the specific design of variadics in Swift will be. But from my understanding, the concern has to do with the return type being a tuple for everything except when there's only one element then it's not a tuple. But again I don't see why this is bad, maybe I'll need to use it in practice to see the issues it will cause.
enum with associated values, pattern matching are separate and were handled with SE-0155, which is not fully implemented, hence the new thread dealing with source compatibility issues regarding the full implementation of the proposal in today's Swift.
Box isn't generic. I'm simply pointing out that you can instantiate an object and get its property the same way you would for a tuple. Which I'm assuming was the point you were showing?
I realise now it's misleading to use Box due to it being a bit of a term of art. A physical cardboard box that has a sticker label was my thinking when writing this example :)
Right, so we've both been speaking with different assumptions. My assumption was that the documentation has a bug and yours is the compiler has the bugs. My thinking was that this is just a limitation of not being able to represent single element tuples and not a design decision. Hence to support it one would not need a proposal and the feature can just be introduced, though I may be wrong in thinking this.
Well, it would be source breaking, so you'd have to show active harm. I do see the argument for confusion, but not so much harm.