[swift-evolution] Take 2: Stdlib closure argument labels and parameter names

[Matthew Johnson]

Sent from my iPad

> On Jul 1, 2016, at 7:03 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> 
> 
>> on Wed Jun 29 2016, Matthew Johnson <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>>> On Jun 29, 2016, at 1:39 AM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I've updated my pull request with a much more conservative set of
>>> changes that preserves/restores label-free-ness for all “term of art”
>>> functional methods such as filter and reduce.
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/2981
>> 
>> I didn't participate in this discussion but want to say that I am
>> pleased with where it ended up.  IMO this looks much better than the
>> earlier version as well as some of the alternative that were
>> discussed.  I think brevity is important for the common functional
>> operators and was previously concerned with the length of some of the
>> names.
>> 
>>> 
>>> My current thoughts are that many of the `by:` labels are awkward and
>>> not adding much.  Perhaps they all ought to be omitted.
>> 
>> Some cases are more awkward than others.  The value added by a label
>> is also greater in some cases than others.  Unfortunately I think
>> these tend to coincide.
>> 
>> That said, I do think the value of a label outweighs the awkwardness
>> in cases like min and max.
> 
> ? min and max are not under discussion here.

Really?  It looks like they're in your table:

smallest = shapes.min(
  isOrderedBefore: haveIncreasingSize)	
smallest = shapes.min(
  by: haveIncreasingSize)

largest = shapes.max(
  isOrderedBefore: haveIncreasingSize)	
largest = shapes.max(
  by: haveIncreasingSize)

> 
>> One change you might consider is to use different labels for
>> comparison and equivalence relations.  'by' feels more natural in the
>> context of comparisons and brevity feels more important in the methods
>> that use a comparator.  On the other hand, I think dropping the use of
>> the word equivalent for 'starts' and 'elementsEqual' feels like a step
>> back in clarity.  Maybe we use 'equivalentBy' in these cases.
>> 
>> A suggestion for the future enhancements - rename elementsEqual to
>> elementsEquivalent.  If we make that change the shorter 'by' label
>> would feel much less awkward to me in this method.
>> 
>> -Matthew
>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Dave
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> 
> -- 
> Dave
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160701/6d7cb88a/attachment-0001.html>