[swift-evolution] Property Getter Return Statement

Adrian Zubarev adrian.zubarev at devandartist.com
Mon Oct 9 14:48:48 CDT 2017

So you’re saying the core team _might_ consider a review if we’ve get a full proposal + implementation in Swift 5 timeframe?

If yes, we only would need someone to implement my proposal. :)

Am 9. Oktober 2017 um 19:54:50, Jordan Rose via swift-evolution (swift-evolution at swift.org) schrieb:

> On Oct 8, 2017, at 21:56, Slava Pestov via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> On Oct 7, 2017, at 7:07 AM, James Valaitis via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> Is it widely agreed that it is necessary to require a return statement on a one line property getter?
>> var session: AVCaptureSession { get { return layer.session } }
>> Or could we follow the convention for any other close and get rid of it? For me it seems redundant; the word `get` literally precedes the closure.
> In multi-file projects, re-compiling one file that references the property would necessitate type checking the body of the getter, even if the getter is defined in a different source file. So one reason not to have this would be to avoid slowing down type checking.

This is not correct. Omitting the "return" is different from omitting the property's type.

(I'm minorly in favor of allowing the 'return' to be omitted for single-expression getters. Not enough to be the person who implements it, but enough to +1 a proposal-with-implementation even in the Swift 5 timeframe.)


swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution at swift.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20171009/06ef5fe7/attachment.html>

More information about the swift-evolution mailing list