Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 25, 2016, at 10:03 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon <[email protected]> wrote: >> Note that, if we do the above, I’d love to make it an error to define a new >> associated type with the same name as an associated type in an inherited >> protocol. It’s odd that we do so, and IIRC the only use case for it is to >> add requirement to an “existing” associated type. > > You also do it to specify or change a default associated type. This is from > an older copy of the stdlib source code, but I believe there's still > something equivalent: > > public protocol CollectionType : Indexable, SequenceType { > associatedtype Generator: GeneratorType = IndexingGenerator<Self> Ah yes, of course! Thank you. - Doug _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
