[swift-evolution] [Pitch] Replace 'inout' with '&'

[Trent Nadeau]

+1

Chris Lattner mentioned that he wants to have a version of Rust's borrowing
syntax eventually. With this change, if we get that, then we keep a very
symmetric syntax:
func foo(x: inout T) called as foo(inout myT)
func foo(x: &T) called as foo(&myT)
func foo(x: &mut T) called as foo(&mut myT)

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Tahoma Toelkes via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

> +1
>
> My sentiments exactly.  As I was catching up on this thread, this was
> almost exactly the syntax I was already considering mentioning when I
> encountered Erica's reply.
>
> I don't know whether it will meet all requirements; however, from a
> readability perspective in both declarations and function type signatures,
> this syntax is the first of the suggestions that feels clear to me.
>
> -- Tahoma
>
> On Dec 21, 2015, at 11:20 AM, Ricardo Parada via swift-evolution <
> swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 19, 2015, at 4:10 PM, Erica Sadun <erica at ericasadun.com> wrote:
>
> What would the ramifications of the following be? Each addresses the
> "confusable with labeling" issue but preserve the inout keyword.
>
> func foo(x: inout Int)
>
> ...
>
>
> I think I like this one better than all the others.
> I have not analyzed all the implications of having it there but it feels
> right.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>
>


-- 
Trent Nadeau
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160106/e1a0ed1c/attachment.html>