> On Nov 11, 2017, at 4:21 AM, Marcel Weiher <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Nov 10, 2017, at 19:04 , Joe Groff via swift-evolution >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I don't like the idea of some calls having wildly different semantics from >> others; > > The obvious solution then is to make this proposal the general case and > current calls a specialization of that.
That'd be great, but Swift violates Gilad Bracha's golden rule by having static overloading, and throws bidirectional type inference on top, so our static name resolution can't be treated as a specialization of a dynamic name lookup mechanism in all cases. -Joe _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
