[swift-evolution] Compiler should generate code base on the functions that have default values

[J. Cheyo Jimenez]

This is very interesting. The first case seems like a bug because the
compiler should not let you define that function().

Do you have any actual examples when you would need to conform to the same
function name but with different signatures?

On Sunday, January 17, 2016, 肇鑫 via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

> This proposal is the summary of the previous protocol function default
> value proposal and some of my new thinkings all together.
>
> Currently the compiler doesn't stop you defining two functions like:
>
> func printSomething(something:String = "some thing") {
>
>     print(something)
>
> }
>
>
> func printSomething() {
>
>     print("some thing!")
>
> }
>
>
> However, when you call it, an error arises.
>
>
> printSomething() // Ambiguous use of 'printSomething'
>
>
> You may say just remove the function that has no argument. But protocol
> needs it.
>
>
> protocol A {
>
>     func printSomething(something:String)
>
>     func printSomething()
>
> }
>
>
> struct Foo:A {
>
>     func printSomething(something:String) {
>
>         print(something)
>
>     }
>
>
>
>     func printSomething() {
>
>         self.printSomething("some thing")
>
>     }
>
> }
>
>
> If you do't define the no-argument function in protocol A. You can not use
> the function by (Foo() as A).printSomething().
>
>
>
> As we all know, a function with default values, can rewrite to two or more
> equivalent functions. For example,
>
>
> struct Bar {
>
>     func add(int1:Int = 1, int2:Int = 2, int3:Int = 3) {
>
>         print(int1 + int2 + int3)
>
>     }
>
> }
>
>
> is equivalent to
>
>
> struct Bar {
>
>     func add(int1:Int, int2:Int, int3:Int) {
>
>         print(int1 + int2 + int3)
>
>     }
>
>
>
>     func add() {
>
>         self.add(1, int2: 2, int3: 3)
>
>     }
>
>
>
>     func add(int1:Int) {
>
>         self.add(int1, int2: 2, int3: 3)
>
>     }
>
>
>
>     func add(int1:Int, int2:Int) {
>
>         self.add(int1, int2: int2, int3: 3)
>
>     }
>
> }
>
>
> So my proposal is let compiler or pre-compiler to generate the code
> internally, without changing the original code,  base on the functions that
> have default values.
>
>
> Then we need not to define multiple functions in a protocol when we need
> function with default values.
>
>
> new code:
>
>
> protocol A {
>
>     func printSomething(something:String)
>
> }
>
>
> struct Foo:A {
>
>     func printSomething(something:String = "some thing") {
>
>         print(something)
>
>     }
>
> }
>
>
>
> If we don't want to change our previous code, we may also need to
> introduce another keyword defaultValue. This keyword is used only in a
> protocol to restrict if a function's argument can have a default value. If
> a function use it, but the implementation doesn't give a default value, or
> vice versa, an error arises.
>
>
> new code:
>
>
> protocol A {
>
>     func printSomething(something:String = defaultValue)
>
> }
>
>
> struct Foo:A {
>
>     func printSomething(something:String = "some thing") {
>
>         print(something)
>
>     }
>
> }
>
>
> This keyword is useful. With it, you can still use Swift in old way. Which
> means you need not to change code like below if you don't want to.
>
>
> old code:
>
>
> protocol A {
>
>     func printSomething(something:String)
>
>     func printSomething()
>
> }
>
>
> struct Foo:A {
>
>     func printSomething(something:String) {
>
>         print(something)
>
>     }
>
>
>
>     func printSomething() {
>
>         self.printSomething("some thing")
>
>     }
>
> }
>
>
> But if you want to write new code. You can just write it in the new
> way, enjoining the simpler and clearer.
>
>
> zhaoxin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160117/871195bf/attachment.html>