[swift-evolution] Remove (!) logical negation operator
rafael at rafaelcosta.me
Wed Dec 16 09:48:43 CST 2015
I think like Jeremy Pereira.
I also am quite surprised that the overloading of the meaning of symbols is
> a serious issue. It’s natural for people to distinguish the meaning of
> things by context. C programmers don’t complain that they are always
> confusing pointer dereferencing with multiplication do they? No.
It is used for two meanings? Yes. Does it cause THAT much of confusion? No.
I really think the way we're going today is just fine. Just an opinion
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 1:28 PM Dennis Lysenko via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> Ilya, +1. I have seen maybe 3-4 force unwraps in a 20,000 lines-of-swift
> codebase. There is no need for them in practice when you use optional
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015, 9:33 AM ilya via swift-evolution <
> swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> Well the best way to make sure there is no confusion is to discourage the
>> usage of both operators.
>> Every time there's an expression that contains an excessive number of !s
>> it can be refactored by extracting separate variables, using non forced
>> unwrapping, comparing with true and false etc.
>> Not sure a syntactic change is warranted.
>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 17:04 Yichen Cao via swift-evolution <
>> swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>> Instead, I prefer the force unwrap to be another character other than
>>> the negate operator. It makes no sense to have the negation operator be
>>> universal and suddenly introduce the force unwrap with the same character.
>>> swift-evolution mailing list
>>> swift-evolution at swift.org
>> swift-evolution mailing list
>> swift-evolution at swift.org
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution