[swift-evolution] [Guidelines, First Argument Labels]: Prepositions inside the parens
jordan_rose at apple.com
Thu Feb 11 20:32:41 CST 2016
> On Feb 11, 2016, at 17:41, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> on Thu Feb 11 2016, Jordan Rose <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>> On Feb 11, 2016, at 16:00, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution
>>> <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>> Doug and I reviewed these, and we don't think they work. The right
>>> criterion for cocoa seems to be “pull ‘of’ into the base name unless—as
>>> Jordan suggested—it means “having.”
>>> Fortunately that seems to be easily determined. After looking at all
>>> the APIs in Cocoa, “of” in the base name means “having” exactly when it
>>> is followed by one of the following words: “type,” “types,” “kind,”
>>> “size,” “length,” and maybe “stage” (we're trying to analyze
>>> to figure out how “of”is being used—assistance welcome).
>> As usual, I object to hardcoded supposedly-exhaustive lists. I'd
>> rather have people fix these up manually with NS_SWIFT_NAME and such.
> We could “automatically fix them up manually” with NS_SWIFT_NAME and let
> the framework owners review the patches, but since we know exactly which
> ones work it would be a huge waste to ask each framework owner to find
> them on their own.
Yes, I'm fine with that. My point is I don't want it added to the automatic translation rules. (I expect to be overruled, again.)
>> Given that the parallel to -removeModifiersOfStage: is
>> -addModifierForProperties:atStage:withBlock:, I think the stage is not
>> being treated as part of the modifier.
> I don't think I understand what you wrote above, sorry.
This is in reference to "we're trying to analyze -removeModifiersOfStage: to figure out how 'of' is being used—assistance welcome". My reading is that it is not an "of" that really means "having".
More information about the swift-evolution