[swift-evolution] [Proposal] Automating Partial Application via Wildcards

[Joe Groff]

Yeah, I'm with Greg—I don't think this saves much over an explicit closure with $N arguments. Another problem with '_' is that it's nonobvious what the boundaries of the closure should be. You can say that it's the enclosing function application, but in the AST, a method invocation is two function applications, so by that rule '_.foo(_)' would mean {{ $0.foo }($0)}, and every operator is a separate function call, so '_ + _ + _' would be '{{ $0 + $1 } + $0}', neither of which is likely to be expected. The { $N } syntax is almost as compact, and is both clearer and more general.

-Joe

> On Feb 2, 2016, at 10:41 AM, Greg Titus via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> 
> What about $N?  :-)  
> 
> And then you could also put {} around it so that it is more obvious that partial1 is being assigned something that acts like a closure, and then you end up with:
> 
> let partial1 = { projectFunctionToCoordinateSystem(function: mySinFunction, p0: p0, p1: p1, x: $0) }
> let partial2 = { projectFunctionToCoordinateSystem(function: mySinFunction, p0: .zero, p1: $0, x: $1) }
> 
> instead of:
>> let partial1 = projectFunctionToCoordinateSystem(function: mySinFunction, p0: p0, p1: p1, x: _) 
>> let partial2 = projectFunctionToCoordinateSystem(function: mySinFunction, p0: .zero, p1: _, x: _) 
> 
> I’m -1.
> 
> With the way that single expression closures work, and the fact that they are so syntactically light, I don’t think that this proposal would add utility, it would just be one more construct to learn.
> 
> 	- Greg
> 
>> On Feb 2, 2016, at 10:28 AM, Gwendal Roué via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution at swift.org>> wrote:
>> 
>> What about nothing?
>> 
>> let partial1 = f(arg1: 1, arg2:)
>> Gwendal
>> 
>>> Le 2 févr. 2016 à 19:26, Gwendal Roué <gwendal.roue at gmail.com <mailto:gwendal.roue at gmail.com>> a écrit :
>>> 
>>> Any operator character would be bad, since the function may accept it, as in `[1,2,3].reduce(1, combine: *)`
>>> 
>>> Gwendal
>>> 
>>>> Le 2 févr. 2016 à 19:24, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution at swift.org>> a écrit :
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 2, 2016, at 11:20 AM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com <mailto:clattner at apple.com>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 2, 2016, at 10:16 AM, Erica Sadun <erica at ericasadun.com <mailto:erica at ericasadun.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> One superficial comment on this: the use of _ here is a bad idea.  _ already means something in expressions - “discard”, and a closely related thing in declarations - “ignore”.  
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Adding a third very different thing (placeholder to be filled in later) seems like a really confusing thing to do.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -Chris
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> #?
>>>>> 
>>>>> # means “macro like” or “compiler synthesized”.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Chris
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> * would be bad, right? And naked ?-marks?
>>>> 
>>>> -- E
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> swift-evolution mailing list
>>>> swift-evolution at swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution at swift.org>
>>>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> swift-evolution mailing list
>> swift-evolution at swift.org <mailto: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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160202/bc048de7/attachment.html>