[swift-evolution] [Pitch] Make `return` optional in computed properties for a single case

[Adrian Zubarev]

Here is the draft proposal: https://github.com/DevAndArtist/swift-evolution/blob/single_expression_optional_return/proposals/nnnn-single-expression-optional-return.md

Did I covered everything case? If you find some mistakes feel free to provide feedback so I can fix the proposal before I submit a PR.



-- 
Adrian Zubarev
Sent with Airmail

Am 31. Mai 2016 um 18:33:09, Leonardo Pessoa via swift-evolution (swift-evolution at swift.org) schrieb:

+1

L

On 31 May 2016 at 12:47, Matthew Johnson via swift-evolution
<swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>
>> On May 28, 2016, at 3:09 AM, David Hart via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>
>> It isn’t a special case because all other single-statement closures in the language work that way. It’s actually inconsistent now.
>
> Computed properties aren’t closures so it’s not inconsistent in that sense. But it is inconsistent in that closures are the *only* value-returning code blocks that are able to use this sugar. It would be nice to see this sugar consistently allowed everywhere in the language.
>
>>
>>> On 28 May 2016, at 09:03, Brian Christensen via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On May 27, 2016, at 13:57, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The idea is simple:
>>>>
>>>> • Can we make return keyword optional in cases like this?
>>>> • Shouldn’t this behave like @autoclosure or @noescape?
>>>> type A {
>>>> var characters: [Character] = …
>>>> var string: String { String(self.characters) }
>>>> var count: Int { 42 }
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> Is this worth a proposal or Swifty enough, what do you think?
>>>>
>>>> Sure I could write return, but why do we allow this behavior for @noescape functions like map!?
>>>
>>> While I am not necessarily against this idea, I do wonder if it’s worth making what’s going on here less obvious simply for the sake of being able to omit a six character keyword. As I understand it, one of the reasons ++/-- were removed was due to the increased "burden to learn Swift as a first programming language.” This is the sort of thing that becomes another one of those special cases that has to be explained to someone new to Swift.
>>>
>>> /brian
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> swift-evolution mailing list
>>> swift-evolution at swift.org
>>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> swift-evolution mailing list
>> swift-evolution at swift.org
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________
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/20160531/35455076/attachment.html>