<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Dec 16, 2015, at 14:27 , Jordan Rose via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Dec 16, 2015, at 14:24 , Michael Gottesman via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" style="font-family: Monaco; font-size: 11px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">My fear about withExtendedLifetime is that the name is a misnomer. You are not extending the lifetime.<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">I assume you mean that you don't need to extend the lifetime, rather than that it's not actually extending anything (because it is, it's just technically extending the lifetime of the UnsafePointer).<br class=""></blockquote><br style="font-family: Monaco; font-size: 11px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><span style="font-family: Monaco; font-size: 11px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">No, what I am saying is that withExtendedLifetime implies some sort of special lifetime extension (otherwise, why would one specifically call it out). It is not performing any sort of special lifetime extension, it is just using the normal lifetime extension rules.</span><br style="font-family: Monaco; font-size: 11px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">withExtendedLifetime <i class="">does</i> extend lifetime: it guarantees that the object will stay alive for the entire body of the closure, rather than being released early by ARC. It's similar to the 'objc_precise_lifetime' attribute in Clang.</div></div></div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div>Michael explained to me that his comments are referring to Kevin's proposed (?) new overload of withExtendedLifetime, not the existing overload which takes a value.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Jordan</div><br class=""></body></html>