# Tuples conform to Equatable

**URL:** <https://forums.swift.org/t/tuples-conform-to-equatable/32559>\
**Category:** Pitches\
**Created:** [January 14, 2020, 1:58am UTC](https://forums.swift.org/t/tuples-conform-to-equatable/32559 "2020-01-14T01:58:41Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 43

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Joe\_Groff](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/swift/user_avatar/forums.swift.org/joe_groff/32/1929_2.png) [@Joe\_Groff](https://forums.swift.org/u/Joe_Groff)\
**Post date:** [January 30, 2020, 7:04pm UTC](https://forums.swift.org/t/tuples-conform-to-equatable/32559/43 "2020-01-30T19:04:08Z")

</div>

> [@Karl](#):
>
> I'll just repeat what I said before: I don't even think this needs a review. There have been times when the core team just straight-up added obvious conformances without a formal proposal, and I think that also makes sense here.
> 
> IIUC, swift-evolution is about the language, not about how the official compiler implements anything, and the evolution process is just about gathering feedback for the core team to make a decision. Is there really any useful feedback to be gained from a review?

It is a fairly significant limitation of the language today that structural types flat out do not support protocol conformance today, and it is a language change to break that assumption. I wouldn't personally expect much contention from the high-order idea that tuples have these protocol conformances, but adding them as a special case does have interactions with future language directions (allowing structural types to conform to protocols, variadics, and such) that need to be considered, and for some conformances like Codable, there are design decisions to be made about what the behavior should be.

---

_[View the full topic](https://forums.swift.org/t/tuples-conform-to-equatable/32559)._