It’s crunch time. Several reviews are running concurrently for just a couple of days. All breaking changes must wrap up in the next week and Swift 4 design starts on 8/1.
Last Second Reviews
SE-0129: Package Manager Test Naming Conventions Accepted. Team writes:
There was relatively little feedback on the proposal but it had unanimous support, along with additional support for the future directions that are unblocked by the proposal with regard to allowing additional target types under the `Tests` convention directory.
SE-0131: Add AnyHashable to the standard library
in review to 7/25. Accepted “Currently the Objective-C type
NSDictionary * is imported as
[NSObject : AnyObject]. We used
NSObject as the key type because it is the closest type (in spirit) to
AnyObject that also conforms to
Hashable. The aim of SE-0116 is to eliminate
AnyObject from imported APIs, replacing it with
Any. To import unannotated NSDictionaries we need an
Any-like type that conforms to
Hashable. Thus, unannotated NSDictionaries will be imported as
[AnyHashable : Any]"
The feedback on this proposal was quite positive. A few questions were raised, but were answered on-thread. Thank you to Dmitri Gribenko for writing this proposal and driving this discussion forward.
SE-0132: Rationalizing Sequence end-operation names
in review to 7/26 is Deferred from Swift 3. “Sequence and Collection offer many special operations which access or manipulate its first or last elements, but they are plagued by inconsistent naming which can make it difficult to find inverses or remember what the standard library offers. We propose that we standardize these names so they follow consistent, predictable patterns.” Team writes:
This is a very large proposal very late in the Swift 3 schedule. It has some clearly good pieces to it, but also many parts that are controversial with the community, and requires more design and iteration than time permits. It is best to defer this and make a change when we have something truly great, giving the benefit of proper time to design and evaluate the proposal.
Thank you to Brent Royal-Gordon and Dave Abrahams for driving this discussion. When the goals and parameters of Swift 4 are established, we should pick up this thread and see what makes sense to do here.
SE-0133: Rename flatten() to joined()
in review to 7/26 Accepted. “This proposal renames
joined() (with no separator argument). It also adds a default separator of
"" to the String-specific version of
joined(separator:).” Team writes:
This proposal had significant positive community feedback for aligning common operation names, but raised questions about whether ‘flatten’ was term of art, and what it would mean for related operations like ‘flatMap’. The core team discussed both sides of this debate, and decided it is best to rename ‘flatten’ to ‘joined’, but keep ‘flatMap’ as it is, to preserve its term of art. The core team prefers that it remain a distinct overload of joined(separator:) to preserve performance. It also requests that the returned collection types (FlattenCollection and friends) be left as-is for now, since they are not names commonly directly referenced, and we’d like to keep the change minimal.
SE-0134: Rename two UTF8-related properties on String
in review to 7/26 Accepted with Revision. “This proposal renames
nulTerminatedUTF8CString to enhance clarity and reduce mismatch between user expectations and the Swift programming language.” Team writes:
This proposal has two parts. The core team approves the first part: “Rename nulTerminatedUTF8CString to utf8CString”. This property is intended for use when interoperating with APIs that take C-style “char *” parameters.
For the second part, the proposal suggests “Rename nulTerminatedUTF8 to nullTerminatedUTF8.” The core team discussed this, looked at various uses of the API (among code bases publicly available on github) and came to the conclusion that it is best to just remove this property outright. The clients we found would be better served using the .utf8CString property.
Last Second Acceptances and Rejections
SE-0122: Use colons for subscript declarations is rejected. Team writes:
The feedback on this proposal from the community was overall divided with a slight bias towards reject. Reasonable arguments were made on both sides: subscripts are definitely property-like in some ways, but they are also function-like in other ways. Further, if we were aiming to align declaration syntax with use, arguably the parameter list should be enclosed in square brackets (but to be clear, we’re not going to do that). Overall, the core team agrees with the pervasive sentiment that this is not important enough to make a change for.
SE-0125: Remove NonObjectiveCBase and isUniquelyReferenced is accepted. Team writes:
This proposal had significant community feedback to help refine and improve its design, and Arnold has incorporated that into his v2 of the proposal. The core team agrees the new revision is a good design.
SE-0127: Cleaning up stdlib Pointer and Buffer Routines is accepted with a modification. Team writes:
This proposal got a significant amount of helpful feedback, which Charlie has already incorporated into the proposal. The core team requests one additional minor change, which is to drop the addition of the
SE-0128: Change failable UnicodeScalar initializers to failable is accepted. Team writes:
Feedback was universally positive, and the proposal is straight forward.
SE-0130: Replace repeating Character and UnicodeScalar forms of String.init is accepted. Team writes:
There was very little public discussion about this proposal, but the core team believes this eliminates a real ambiguity, while leaving doors open for future improved designs.
Wrapping up Swift 3
Of these four reviews, SE-0131 and SE-0134 are “gimmes” — that is, minor fixes that need relatively little discussion, offer obvious improvements, and can be evaluated on the spur of the moment. SE-0133 requires a little thought (“A concatenation of the elements of
self“), but is also an easy up-or-down vote.
In contrast, SE-0132 is huge. It really deserves more time, attention, and consideration than the Apple-imposed deadline will allow. Brent‘s done a lot of work on perfecting this. If time permitted, it would have benefited from a few more weeks of discussion and revision.
Swift 3 Timeline
Swift 3’s timeline concerns me. It will be ready for GM release along with Xcode 8 and iOS 10. I, personally, would prefer Swift 3 to be delayed six months or more to get it right the first time. As the planned major “breaking” release, the idea is twofold:
- Offer incremental adoption by supporting Swift 2.3, which allows developers to build for the App Store using modern APIs in Swift 2.
- Incorporate breaking code into Swift 3, so Swift 4 is ” as source compatible with Swift 3 as we can reasonably accomplish”. Further: “[S]ource breaking changes will be much more difficult to justify after Swift 3 is out the door, we’re prefer to roll them into Swift 3 where ever possible.”
With just a few days left before it becomes really really hard to fix fundamental design (although, I anticipate that dot-version changes to Swift 3 will be slightly more forgiving than Swift 3-to-Swift 4 changes), there’s been a big rush to find obvious flaws. For example, Open Issues Affecting Standard Library API Stability.
Update: Chris Lattner writes, “I strongly suspect there will be at least one 3.x release.”
On the other hand, August 1 is when the rush of additive proposals that have been back-burnered can come out and play. Swift 3 was all about getting the core language design fixed. Swift 4 is when new features can be considered. I’m hoping for things like method cascades, lenses, a better suite of functional programming tools, macros, strings-on-steroids, namespacing (without enums), and more.
[…] Erica Sadun: […]