[swift-evolution] Proposal: Always flatten the single element tuple

Xiaodi Wu xiaodi.wu at gmail.com
Wed Jun 7 11:10:38 CDT 2017

On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 10:03 Gwendal Roué <gwendal.roue at gmail.com> wrote:

> Le 7 juin 2017 à 15:52, Xiaodi Wu <xiaodi.wu at gmail.com> a écrit :
> Let’s clarify: you just wrote that you have problems with SE-0029,
> SE-0066, SE-0110, and “before,” did you not?
> WTF? No I did not (citation below)!
> Le 7 juin 2017 à 15:02, Gwendal Roué <gwendal.roue at gmail.com> a écrit :
> Le 7 juin 2017 à 14:42, Vladimir.S <svabox at gmail.com> a écrit :
> Gwendal, again, you are proposing to revert not just SE-0110 and SE-0066
> but mainly SE-0029 "Remove implicit tuple splat behavior from function
> applications"
> (
> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0029-remove-implicit-tuple-splat.md
> )
> Do you mean that the regressions Stephen and I have shown have been
> introduced not only by SE-0110, but before SE-0066, and SE-0029?
> Your attitude is obnoxious. Enough Swift evolution for me today.

Please refrain from personal attacks. Are we reading the same sentence? I
see that you literally listed three proposals (and “before”) and blamed
them for “regressions” that you want to reverse. If that’s not your
meaning, what do you mean?

I asked you in my first reply to you, is your view that the distinction
itself between (Int, Int) -> Int and ((Int, Int)) -> Int is problematic? If
so, this is a very different discussion from seeking solutions to mitigate
particular ergonomic issues that arise from the change. However, you have
not answered the question.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20170607/d6562d5b/attachment.html>

More information about the swift-evolution mailing list