[swift-evolution] [Proposal] Conventionalizing stride semantics
erica at ericasadun.com
Tue Mar 1 11:22:00 CST 2016
I'm open to other name suggestions for the three styles.
> On Mar 1, 2016, at 2:18 AM, Seth Friedman via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> I take issue with the proposed definition of "through" used. When Googling "definition of through", the example sentence used for the definition Erica provided is "The approach to the church is through the gate". Doesn't sound like we're discussing ranges there; sounds like location.
> A more range-based definition that pops up is "up to and including (a particular point in an ordered sequence)", which sounds exactly like the way "through" is being used today in stride. Example sentence given: "They will be in town from March 24 through May 7". Commonly, English speakers often refer to the numbers "1 through 10", which refers to [1, 10].
> I also have a strong distaste for "towards", as the ambiguity that Xiaodi mentioned makes it seem like you could reach any point before 10 in the range [1, 10), be it 2 all the way through 9 (notice I use "through" here to mean [2, 9]).
> I feel like ultimately this proposal makes the semantics of stride less clear. While the naming today seems pretty obvious to me, I would absolutely have to frequently refer to documentation if the proposed changes were accepted. The changes proposed don't seem to match the semantics of words used every day to describe ranges.
More information about the swift-evolution