[swift-evolution] [pitch] adding toggle to Bool
Anders Kierulf
anders at smartgo.com
Fri Jan 12 16:34:17 CST 2018
I also avoid using ! for negation when possible, and `toggle` or `invert` will be helpful, but in many cases I think the negative case is better expressed directly. For example, I find that using `nonEmpty` instead of !isEmpty makes the code easier to read:
extension String {
var nonEmpty: Bool { return !self.isEmpty }
}
if !string.isEmpty { … }
if string.isEmpty.inverted() { … }
if string.nonEmpty { … }
For the case of `contains`, maybe define `lacks`?
if !items.contains(item) { ... }
if items.contains(item).inverted() { ... }
if items.lacks(item) { ... }
Anders Kierulf
> On Jan 12, 2018, at 12:54 PM, Alejandro Martinez via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>
> I wouldn't go as far as to ask to fade out ! but in all my code I end
> up doing == false just for readability. That ! knows who to hide
> himself too well :P
>
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 10:13 AM, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution
> <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>> I’m not sure if this would be considered or not, but I would like if the
>> negation operator `!` would fade out.
>>
>> If this is ever going to a review then I’d suggest that we add a pair of
>> functions, one mutating and the other non-mutating.
>>
>> extension Bool {
>> mutating func invert() {
>> self = !self
>> }
>>
>> func inverted() {
>> return !self
>> }
>> }
>>
>> I’d rather use `inverted` instead of `!` because of the readability this
>> function provides.
>>
>> if !items.contains(item) { ... }
>>
>> if items.contains(item).inverted() { ... }
>>
>> ——
>>
>> I personally have some other extensions like:
>>
>> extension Bool {
>> @discardableResult
>> func whenTrue<T>(execute closure: () throws -> T) rethrows -> T? {
>> if self { return try closure() }
>> return nil
>> }
>>
>> @discardableResult
>> func whenFalse<T>(execute closure: () throws -> T) rethrows -> T? {
>> if !self { return try closure() }
>> return nil
>> }
>> }
>>
>> But this is more a personal preference.
>>
>> ——
>>
>> That said, if the community is fine with the `invert/inverted` pair then I’d
>> say go for it ;)
>>
>> Am 12. Januar 2018 um 09:14:22, Nate Cook via swift-evolution
>> (swift-evolution at swift.org) schrieb:
>>
>>
>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 12:15 AM, Chris Eidhof via swift-evolution
>> <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hey SE!
>>
>> When we have a bunch of nested structs:
>>
>> struct Sample {
>> var bar: Bar
>> }
>>
>> struct Bar {
>> var show: Bool
>> }
>>
>> var foo = Sample(bar: Bar(show: false))
>>
>> It can be repetitive to toggle a deeply nested boolean:
>>
>> foo.bar.show = !foo.bar.show // duplication
>>
>> I sometimes add a `toggle` extension on `Bool`
>>
>> extension Bool {
>> mutating func toggle() {
>> self = !self
>> }
>> }
>>
>> This allows you to write the same code without duplication, and makes the
>> intent clearer:
>>
>> foo.bar.show.toggle()
>>
>>
>> I like it!
>>
>> In other languages, I don't think the `toggle` would make as much sense, but
>> the mutable self makes this very useful.
>>
>> After I posted it on Twitter, it turns out I'm not the only one:
>> https://twitter.com/PublicExtension/status/730434956376346624
>>
>> I would have gone straight to a proposal, but I think we can do some
>> bikeshedding about the name of `toggle`?
>>
>>
>> Another verb that could work is `invert`.
>>
>> The `!` operator that does this is the negation operator, but I think
>> `negate` could sound to some like "make this false" rather than toggling.
>>
>> Nate
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Alejandro Martinez
> http://alejandromp.com
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
More information about the swift-evolution
mailing list