[swift-evolution] [swift-evolution-announce] [Review] SE-0099: Restructuring Condition Clauses

[Brandon Knope]

Except I disagree. 

It might seem like a stylistic flourish, but it can be more expressive in informing the reader that the variable after the where clause was recently introduced somewhere in the preceding clause. 

Without it, you'd have to scan the entire conditional clause and around the conditional statement to find a variable. 

let x = 5

.... 6 lines later ....

let y = y where y == 10, x == 5

having the where here makes it clear that x was introduced elsewhere. You might not have known that because x was introduced several lines up. 

It's contrived, but imagine a very long conditional or guard statement and I think where still has a place especially in aiding readability. 

B

> On May 31, 2016, at 4:31 PM, Xiaodi Wu <xiaodi.wu at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Brandon Knope <bknope at me.com> wrote:
>> What is wrong with:
>> 
>> if let x = x where x > 10, y != 5, let z = z where z != x
>> 
>> Just as a contrived example?
> 
> Because any grammar that permits what you propose would necessarily permit:
> 
> ```
> if let x = x, x > 10, y != 5, let z = z, z != x
> ```
> 
> Thus, `where` becomes redundant, a vestigial stylistic flourish.
> 
>> 
>> Brandon 
>> 
>>> On May 31, 2016, at 4:03 PM, Xiaodi Wu <xiaodi.wu at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Brandon Knope <bknope at me.com> wrote:
>>>> Except "b" is the main focus of the where clause and b was just in the preceding if condition. 
>>>> 
>>>> I feel like we are trying to find ways to break the current where clause even though we've enjoyed it for almost a year now. I had no idea it was problematic and restrictive. I thought it made its intent very clear...leading to very readable code. 
>>>> 
>>>> Pretty soon almost every construct but conditionals will be allowed to have where clauses, and THAT seems inconsistent to me. 
>>>> 
>>>> ...what exactly is the current problem? Can someone show me a real world example?? I've already forgotten it in all of this discussion -_-
>>> 
>>> The origin of the problem is a simple question: how does one test for something unrelated to the variable that's bound in an `if let` statement? The answer is: in today's Swift, any such test after the first `let` must come after `where`. This is problematic and restrictive because one is forced to imply a semantic relationship that doesn't exist.
>>>  
>>>> Brandon 
>>>> 
>>>>> On May 31, 2016, at 3:47 PM, Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Christopher Kornher via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Not allowed:
>>>>>>>> …
>>>>>>>> let a = a
>>>>>>>> let b = b where b > 10 && a > 5
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Why would this not be allowed by your rule? You're making use of `b` in your where clause. As I demonstrated above, essentially any assertion can be rewritten to work around your rule. In general:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> It is not allowed because  ‘a’ is defined in the line above. It must be defined in the ‘if let’ associated with the where in which it is mentioned.
>>>>> 
>>>>> That's a much more restrictive where clause than you proposed earlier. You'd not be able to write:
>>>>> 
>>>>> ```
>>>>> let b = b where b > anyOtherVariable
>>>>> ``` 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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/20160531/83c0c009/attachment.html>