[swift-evolution] A shortcut for weakly referencing functions
Joe Groff
jgroff at apple.com
Fri Apr 1 12:35:59 CDT 2016
As we briefly discussed on Twitter, I feel like Swift already has too much closure syntax as it is. { [unowned self] self.doSomething($0) } is definitely more text than self.doSomething, but it's clear what it's doing. "self.doSomething" method applications are also the only place where we directly capture an object into a closure without explicit closure syntax, which is where much of the surprise about memory leaks comes from. Even when strong references are desired, it's arguable that { self.doSomething($0) } is still preferable, since it's more obviously capturing `self`, and that the 'self.doSomething' shorthand is a misfeature.
-Joe
> On Apr 1, 2016, at 8:09 AM, Radosław Pietruszewski via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>
> Here’s a pattern I find myself doing quite often:
>
> 1> class Child {
> 2. var onSomeEvent: () -> Void = { }
> 3. }
> 4> class Parent {
> 5. let child = Child()
> 6. init() {
> 7. child.onSomeEvent = doSomething
> 8. }
> 9. func doSomething() {
> 10. }
> 11. }
>
> I have some ownership hierarchy of classes (often controllers — view controllers — views), where I pass information from children up to parents using closures set by the parent.
>
> I like this pattern because children classes don’t have to be tied to knowledge about their parents, and I don’t have to define delegate protocols. It’s very clean, and also very easy to set up.
>
> The only problem is that there’s a strong danger of introducing reference cycles.
>
> With class properties, you can quite easily see the potential for a reference cycle and mark references to parents with weak/unowned. And with `self` captures in closures, you’re reminded of memory management by having to be explicit about `self`. But when passing references from parents to children, there’s no way to mark the closure property as `weak` (and there’s no reminder of the danger).
>
> * * *
>
> Right now, every time I pass a closure down to children, I have to wrap my references like so:
>
> { [unowned self] self.doSomething($0) }
>
> instead of a neat and simple function reference:
>
> doSomething
>
> I think it would be useful to have a shortcut syntax for creating weak and unowned references to functions, like so:
>
> @unowned(doSomething)
>
> or perhaps:
>
> #unowned(self.doSomething)
>
> * * *
>
> An alternative would be the ability to mark closure properties as weak or unowned. Then I could, at the *child* level, say:
>
> unowned let onSomeEvent: () -> Void
>
> * * *
>
> Does this make sense? What do you think?
>
> — Radek
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
More information about the swift-evolution
mailing list