[swift-evolution] ed/ing, InPlace, Set/SetAlgebra naming resolution

[Dave Abrahams]

on Thu Feb 11 2016, Jarod Long <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

>> On Feb 11, 2016, at 15:20, Erica Sadun <erica at ericasadun.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Feb 11, 2016, at 4:17 PM, Dave Abrahams
>>> <dabrahams at apple.com
>>> <mailto:dabrahams at apple.com>> wrote:
>
>>> 
>>> For the record, I do not feel at all confident anything like this will
>>> end up in swift.  This feature was proposed back in 2013, before Swift
>>> was released, eventually accepted then not implemented because we were
>>> out of time, then revised, then re-accepted and implemented, then ripped
>>> out of the compiler because of various concerns about what it does to
>>> the shape of the language (e.g. is this just a second version of
>>> “mutating?”  What about classes?).  Based on history, I don't think it's
>>> a sure bet, and I personally may be out of energy and time to fight for
>>> it.  But we'll have to see...
>>> 
>
> Interesting -- I wasn't aware of the history of the proposal. I would
> be very interested in revisiting it to get the consideration of the
> larger Swift community. Is this something that would be reasonable in
> the Swift 3 timeframe, or should this wait until we can discuss Swift
> 4?

Realistically, I think that proposal cannot be considered for Swift 3.

>> Using foo and fooInPlace is obvious, understandable, and easy. As a
>> suffix, it perfectly communicates the difference between a mutating
>> and non-mutating version, and doesn't involve anything on the level
>> of gerunds, past participles, pluperfects, prozac, or anything like
>> that.
>> 
>> -- E
>
> As for the immediate situation, I agree with this. InPlace feels
> clunky, but it's the only naming-based solution I've seen that clearly
> communicates the semantics in all cases.
>
> Jarod 
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

-- 
-Dave