[swift-evolution] [Draft Proposal] A simplified notation for avoiding the weak/strong dance with closure capture lists

[Kurt Werle]

I had trouble parsing, too, for some reason.  In fact, that is what his
amended proposal states - the else part is to be dropped.

I like this proposal, though I do wonder if it would be nice to have the
syntax
[unowned self]?

So we could also adapt
func requiresNonNilParameters(some: MyClass!)? -> Whatever

that returns if all the parameters are != nil.

Still, I'd be happy if [guard self] did what is proposed.

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Jason Gregori via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

> I like Kenny and Kurt's points about handling the majority case and
> keeping the syntax simpler.
>
> I feel like most of the time I want to break a retain cycle is for a
> completion block which returns void. Can we just handle that case and get
> rid of the else?
>
> Also, I don't think [guard self] is self explanatory enough. I think weak
> should be in there so it's much more obvious you are doing the weak/strong
> dance with self, otherwise it looks like you are guarding against a regular
> optional being nil.
>
> So:
>
> [guard weak self, other]
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>
>


-- 
kurt at CircleW.org
http://www.CircleW.org/kurt/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160212/ede9ad35/attachment.html>