ValueSemantic protocol

[anandabits (Matthew Johnson)]

@dabrahams

I believe what I wrote accommodates such types without the need for any exceptions. If you see something in the document that makes you think otherwise, please explain.

I believe so as well. I’m think your definition is a great start! Thank you for putting the effort into laying it out so clearly and for including pragmatic conventions.

If the community adopts this definition and we move ahead with a proposal to bring support into the language what do you think we do with function types? Would we do something similar to what @Chris_Lattner3 suggested here for ActorSendable?

@xwu

it'd be not very useful to argue whether Never has value semantics.

I would argue that it should conform. Not having this conformance would break the use of Never as a bottom type for APIs that are constrained to ValueSemantic. I have written lots of generic code that uses Never in this way and would use ValueSemantic.