[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0065 A New Model for Collections and Indices

[Thorsten Seitz]

The nonmutating forms  successor/predecessor were fine. No need to match them with the mutating ones IMO.

-Thorsten 

> Am 13.04.2016 um 21:57 schrieb Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org>:
> 
> 
> on Wed Apr 13 2016, Dave Abrahams <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> 
>>> Reverse is the best opposite we have of advance, so it makes sense to
>>> me.
>> 
>> Oh, I get it.
>> 
>>> Or we could use retreat. =) There are other pairs of words that work
>>> as well, like “increment/decrement”.
>> 
>> Yeah, unfortunately those carry an incorrect implication when the
>> indices are numbers, because, e.g. the collection might be offsetting
>> the number by 2 for each position.  One could of course argue that using
>> numbers that way as indices was a bad design choice.
>> 
>> I'll have to think about that idea again.  We considered and rejected it
>> for a reason, but it might not be a really strong one.  Thanks for
>> bringing it up.
> 
> ...and having talked it over at lunch, now I remember why we rejected
> it: there's no good way to make a nonmutating version.
> 
>  let x = c.incremented(i)   // reads like an assertion about the past
>  let y = c.incrementing(i)  // reads like it has side-effects and returns c, or
>                             // a new version of c
> 
> APIs where the receiver returns a modified version of an argument don't
> lend themselves to verb forms.
> 
> -- 
> Dave
> 
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution