[swift-evolution] [Proposal] Remove force unwrapping in function signature.
clattner at apple.com
Wed Jul 20 14:52:16 CDT 2016
On Jul 19, 2016, at 3:46 PM, Saagar Jha <saagarjha28 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I have updated the proposal here <https://gist.github.com/saagarjha/f33fecd4576f40133b6469da942ef453>. Since this is a potentially a source breaking change, I’d like this to be considered for Swift 3; unless anyone has any issues with it, I’m going to push this to swift-evolution.
- The syntax proposed would be *completely* unlike anything in Swift, and is semantically changing things unrelated to the type.
- This proposal doesn’t work, and overly punishes IUOs.
I recommend that we do not discuss this proposal, as it would not be a good use of community time. Beyond the unworkability of this specific proposal, in my personal opinion, there is nothing wrong with the T! syntax. Making it significantly more verbose would be a very *bad* thing for the intended use cases.
> Saagar Jha
>> On Jul 5, 2016, at 13:30, Saagar Jha <saagarjha28 at gmail.com <mailto:saagarjha28 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Gave me a chuckle, but yeah, basically.
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 12:54 PM William Jon Shipley <wjs at delicious-monster.com <mailto:wjs at delicious-monster.com>> wrote:
>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 9:22 AM, Saagar Jha via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution at swift.org>> wrote:
>>> When I see an IUO property, I consider it a sort of “contract”–it’s basically saying something like “I can’t set this to a valid value right now, but by the time you use it I promise that it’s non nil”
>> You might say that an IUO is sort of an IOU?
>> -Saagar Jha
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution