[swift-evolution] Replace named returns with `out` parameters?

[Daniel Leping]

-1 here. What's wrong with tuples? Don't kill functional approach

On Wed, 28 Dec 2016 at 19:35 Micah Hainline via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

> You haven't really explained what problem this solves, and it would have
> to be a pretty big one to justify such a change.
>
> I'm -1 on this, until a compelling argument is made. This feels like just
> liking the syntax of another language and wanting it in Swift.
>
> On Dec 28, 2016, at 5:09 AM, Anton Zhilin via swift-evolution <
> swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>
> Some people on the list wondered, why we have moved from tuples in
> function parameters, but multiple returns are still implemented using
> tuples? The following code still compiles:
>
>
> func position() -> (x: Int, y: Int) {
>
>     return (x: 0, y: 0)
>
> }
>
>
>
> let (y, x) = position()
>
>
>
> (Maybe it’s a bad example, because naturally we’d use Point struct. Let’s
> pretend those two parameters don’t make sense as a struct.)
>
>
> What I want to discuss is if we should introduce out parameters *and*
> make them the default for multiple returns for Swift 4. The syntax would
> look like:
>
>
> func position(x: out Int, y: out Int) {
>
>     x = 0
>
>     y = 0
>
> }
>
>
>
> var y
>
> position(x: let x, y: y)
>
>
>
> out arguments can be any patterns allowed on the left side of assignment,
> including wildcard pattern and tuple destructuring pattern.
>
>
> ​
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161228/318544f1/attachment.html>