On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 3:58 PM Dave Abrahams <dabrah...@apple.com> wrote:
> > on Wed Jul 27 2016, Ted Kremenek <kremenek-AT-apple.com> wrote: > > > - swift-evolution, swift-evolution-announce > > > > Dave/Max: can you speak this? > > >> On Jul 27, 2016, at 3:17 PM, Tony Allevato <allev...@google.com> wrote: > >> > >> I noticed that while SE-0091 appears to be implemented (from a > >> cursory glance at some of the affected types like Equatable and > >> String), it looks like the named methods are still part of the > >> FloatingPoint protocol and they still use global operators. > >> > >> Is anyone tracking the migration of that protocol (and possibly also > >> the new Integer protocols) to use the new operator technique? (I > >> have to apologize for not being able to update the proposal with > >> another PR that listed all those changes—my free time outside my day > >> job has been significantly reduced lately.) > > I think we view those changes as implicitly approved along with SE-0091. > I was working on making them but we've run into bugs with the feature's > implementation during the migration. When those are straightened out, > we can move forward with that cleanup. > That's good to hear. Thanks for confirming! > > >> On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:38 PM Ted Kremenek via swift-evolution > >> <swift-evolut...@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolut...@swift.org>> > >> wrote: > >> Dear friends, > >> > >> Today is July 27 — and the last planned day to take source-breaking > >> changes for Swift 3. It has been an incredible ride to this point, > >> so let's take stock of where we are. Here are the list of currently > >> accepted — but not yet (fully) implemented — evolution proposals > >> (this is drawn from the "accepted" but not marked "implemented" > >> proposals from the swift-evolution > >> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution> repository): > >> > >> SE-0025 - Scoped Access Level > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0025-scoped-access-level.md > > > >> SE-0042 - Flattening the function type of unapplied method > >> references > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0042-flatten-method-types.md > > > >> SE-0045 - Add scan, prefix(while:), drop(while:), and iterate to the > >> stdlib > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0045-scan-takewhile-dropwhile.md > > > >> SE-0068 - Expanding Swift Self to class members and value types > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0068-universal-self.md > > > >> SE-0075 - Adding a Build Configuration Import Test > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0075-import-test.md > > > >> SE-0077 - Improved operator declarations > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0077-operator-precedence.md > > > >> SE-0080 - Failable Numeric Conversion Initializers > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0080-failable-numeric-initializers.md > > > >> SE-0081 - Move where clause to end of declaration > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0081-move-where-expression.md > > > >> SE-0082 - Package Manager Editable Packages > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0082-swiftpm-package-edit.md > > > >> SE-0088 - Modernize libdispatch for Swift 3 naming conventions > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0088-libdispatch-for-swift3.md > > > >> SE-0089 - Renaming String.init<T>(_: T) > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0089-rename-string-reflection-init.md > > > >> SE-0092 - Typealiases in protocols and protocol extensions > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0092-typealiases-in-protocols.md > > > >> SE-0096 - Converting dynamicType from a property to an operator > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0096-dynamictype.md > > > >> SE-0099 - Restructuring Condition Clauses > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0099-conditionclauses.md > > > >> SE-0101 - Reconfiguring sizeof and related functions into a > >> unified MemoryLayout struct > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0101-standardizing-sizeof-naming.md > > > >> SE-0102 - Remove @noreturn attribute and introduce an > >> empty Never type > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0102-noreturn-bottom-type.md > > > >> SE-0103 - Make non-escaping closures the default > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0103-make-noescape-default.md > > > >> SE-0104 - Protocol-oriented integers > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0104-improved-integers.md > > > >> SE-0107 - UnsafeRawPointer API > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0107-unsaferawpointer.md > > > >> SE-0110 - Distinguish between single-tuple and multiple-argument > >> function types > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0110-distingish-single-tuple-arg.md > > > >> SE-0111 - Remove type system significance of function argument > >> labels > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0111-remove-arg-label-type-significance.md > > > >> SE-0120 - Revise partition Method Signature > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0120-revise-partition-method.md > > > >> SE-0127 - Cleaning up stdlib Pointer and Buffer Routines > >> < > https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0127-cleaning-up-stdlib-ptr-buffer.md > > > >> These are all changes the community has approved for Swift but did > >> not make today's cutoff. Some of these proposals have > >> implementations actively underway. For those proposals already in > >> active development — and near completion — I am okay with extending > >> the deadline for those changes to Friday, July 29. Such changes need > >> to be approved by the release manager (myself) and should be merged > >> into master via a pull request. When creating the pull request, > >> please assign it to me (tkremenek), and mention the pull request on > >> the swift-dev mailing list as well with the SE number in the email > >> title. > >> > >> The rest of the unimplemented proposals do not make Swift 3. This > >> leaves us with the question of what to do with them. These proposals > >> represent the known and reviewed changes we want to make to Swift, > >> but inevitably there will also be changes that we don't even know > >> about today that we will want to take into Swift that can impact > >> core source stability. That said, we also have a very strong desire > >> to maintain source compatibility with Swift 3 and Swift 4 as much as > >> possible to provide some stability for which Swift users to build > >> upon. The challenge of course is reconciling these diametrically > >> opposing goals: maintaining source stability while having the > >> ability to incorporate more core (and important) language changes > >> that are possibly source-breaking. > >> > >> The Swift team at Apple has reflected on this and decided what it > >> "means" for Swift 3 to be source compatible with Swift 4 and later > >> releases going forward. Our goal is to allow app developers to > >> combine a mix of Swift modules (e.g., SwiftPM packages), where each > >> module is known to compile with a specific version of the language > >> (module A works with Swift 3, module B works with Swift 3.1, etc.), > >> then combine those modules into a single binary. The key feature is > >> that a module can be migrated from Swift 3 to 3.1 to 4 (and beyond) > >> independently of its dependencies. > >> > >> While the exact details of how we will accomplish this feat are > >> still being discussed, here is a sketch of how this will likely work > >> in the Swift 4 timeframe. The key enabler is a new compiler flag > >> that indicates the language version to compile for (e.g., similar to > >> the clang -std=c99 flag). The compiler flag will be provided by the > >> build system you are using (e.g., Xcode, SwiftPM, etc.) on a > >> per-module basis: > >> > >> For language syntax/semantics, the compiler can use the language > >> mode to properly implement the language version being used by a > >> module. > >> > >> For the Standard Library, additive and subtractive changes are > >> easily handled (the former by just adding them, the later by using > >> deprecation techniques). For semantics changes, things are much more > >> complicated, and will need further study. > >> > >> The great thing about this approach is that a single Swift 4 > >> compiler is building all of the sources in an application. This > >> allows us to roll out this approach before achieving full ABI > >> stability — something that will be a goal for Swift 4, but is > >> impractical to achieve for a Swift 3.x release. It also provides us > >> a general framework in the future for handling source compatibility > >> as Swift evolves. > >> > >> To make this more concrete, suppose an application is written to use > >> Swift 4, but uses packages via SwiftPM that are written using Swift > >> 3. A single compiler would build both the app and the packages — > >> thus ensuring that all the compiled sources are binary > >> compatible. It would not be the case that a framework built with the > >> Swift 3 compiler could be used by an app built using the Swift 4 > >> compiler. That kind of library binary stability (ABI) will be a key > >> goal of the Swift 4 release. > >> > >> These constraints mentioned above will serve as scaffolding for > >> Swift 4 development. Discussion about Swift 4 commences on > >> Monday. Ahead of that, Chris Lattner plans to send out thoughts from > >> the Core team on some of the known key goals (and non-goals) for the > >> release. In the meantime, the focus over the next couple days should > >> be taking stock of what has landed for Swift 3 and to see if any of > >> the proposals mentioned above are close to being completed or are > >> truly out of scope. > >> > >> Thank you again to everyone for making Swift 3 such as fantastic > release! > >> > >> Ted > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> swift-evolution mailing list > >> swift-evolut...@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolut...@swift.org> > >> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution < > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution> > > > > -- > -Dave >
_______________________________________________ swift-dev mailing list swift-dev@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
