<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 19, 2015, at 4:10 PM, Erica Sadun <<a href="mailto:erica@ericasadun.com" class="">erica@ericasadun.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">What would the ramifications of the following be? Each addresses the "confusable with labeling" issue but preserve the inout keyword.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><font face="Courier" class="">func foo(x: inout Int)</font></div><div class=""><span style="font-family: Courier;" class="">func foo(x: @inout(Int))</span></div><div class=""><font face="Courier" class="">func foo(x: @inout Int)</font></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Is there an underlying reason that parameter modification should live on the name side rather than the type side of the colon? They aren't really modifying the name</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">-- Erica, inexperienced with Rust</div></div></div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div>Putting `inout` after the colon feels good to me. Like Jordan said, it meshes better with the type syntax, (inout Int) -> (), too.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>-Joe</div><br class=""></body></html>