<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div></div><div><br></div><div><br>On 05 Dec 2015, at 22:36, Jacob Bandes-Storch <<a href="mailto:jtbandes@gmail.com">jtbandes@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr">When you use "weak self", self becomes Optional inside the closure, and indeed it *can* become nil partway through. This is the same as __weak in Objective-C, and there's actually a clang warning for it (search for "repeated-use-of-weak" or see <a href="http://devstreaming.apple.com/videos/wwdc/2013/404xbx2xvp1eaaqonr8zokm/404/404.pdf" target="_blank">http://devstreaming.apple.com/videos/wwdc/2013/404xbx2xvp1eaaqonr8zokm/404/404.pdf</a>).</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yep, that's correct.</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>That's why "guard let strongSelf = self" is important, and I think "guard let self = self" would add value without adding confusion.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Agree that weakStrong can be confusing and there's maybe better way to do it. But at least, "guard let self = self" would be enough and we can avoid ugly and long strongSel with it.<br><div><br></div><div>Robert</div></body></html>