Karoy Lorentey

We could still have a type that makes it explicit what's happening and allows more convenient construction (sort of like `OpaquePointer`, but also covering the numerical cases). (Given that I...

@swift-ci test

@swift-ci test

I'd be happy with either option! I like `relativeTo:`, too.

This package is severely resource constrained. Experimenting in a separate code base is the right move for now, at least until we manage to unblock the release pipeline. - Replacing...

`Heap` has shipped in release 1.1.0! I'm closing this issue; we can continue investigating higher-level wrapper types / variants on followup issues.

> It would be nice if `SortedSet` didn’t require `Element` to conform to `Comparable`, and instead could take a comparator closure (`(Element, Element) -> Bool`), like the `sort(by:)` family of...

In case Xcode project generation is still a thing these days, getting rid of the C module with something along the lines of https://github.com/apple/swift-atomics/pull/74 will likely eliminate these issues. However,...

I believe https://github.com/apple/swift-atomics/pull/97 also resolves this (on the off chance the package works with a toolchain version that still supports `generate-xcodeproj` -- that command has been removed in some release...

Looping over swift_retain/release technically doesn't break correctness, but if the loop survives into the generated binary, then the resulting code will have unacceptably bad performance. So this isn't a viable...