[swift-evolution] [Proposal] mapValues

[Maximilian Hünenberger]

I like the idea of having a mapping method which maps back to the actual type.
What about a more general approach? consider:

mappedSelf(transform: T -> U) -> Self<U>
filteredSelf(includeElement: T -> Bool) -> Self<U>

Which can be added to other collections like Set and sequences like a lazy number sequence.

Best regards
- Maximilian

> Am 13.04.2016 um 08:41 schrieb Jonathan Hull via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org>:
> 
> I would really like to see something like the following added to the standard library:
> 
> extension Dictionary {
>     
>     func mapValues<U>(transform:(Key,Value)->U)->[Key:U] {
>         var output:[Key:U] = [:]
>         for (k,v) in self {
>             output[k] = transform(k,v)
>         }
>         return output
>     }
>     
> }
> 
> It comes up enough that I have had to add it to pretty much every one of my projects.  I also don’t feel comfortable adding it to my frameworks, since I figure a lot of people are also adding something like this to their projects, and I don’t want to cause a conflict with their version.  Prime candidate for the standard library.
> 
> I like calling it ‘mapValues' as opposed to providing an override for map, since it makes the specific behavior more clear.  I would expect ‘map' to possibly map the keys as well (though there are issues where the new keys overlap).  I suppose you could just have a bunch of overrides for map if the compiler becomes good enough at differentiating return types: (Value)->(Value), (Key,Value)->Value, (Key, Value)->(Key,Value)
> 
> Thanks,
> Jon
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160418/2ded35b7/attachment.html>