> On Jul 28, 2017, at 3:59 PM, Jordan Rose via swift-dev <swift-dev@swift.org> > wrote: > >>> So generic code to instantiate type metadata would have to construct these >>> mangled strings eagerly? >> >> We already do exactly that for the ObjC runtime name of generic class >> instantiations, for what it's worth, but it could conceivably be lazy as >> well, at the cost of making the comparison yet more expensive. There aren't >> that many runtime operations that need to do type comparison, though—the >> ones I can think of are casting and the equality/hashing operations on >> Any.Type—so how important is efficient type comparison? > > I'm still strongly against any feature that relies on type names being > present at runtime. I think we should be able to omit those for both code > size and secrecy reasons when the type isn't an @objc class or protocol.
Out of curiosity, is there something that strongly motivates this? Aren’t code obfuscation tools good enough for the few people who care? Actually achieving “secrecy” would require revising the mangling scheme and making lots of other changes to the runtime metadata. This would be very complicated and expensive, and almost no one cares AFAIK. -Chris
_______________________________________________ swift-dev mailing list swift-dev@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
