<div dir="ltr">On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Антон Жилин <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>`b + c * d / e` is not, obviously.</div><div>`a ? b : c + x + y` -- I'd also say not, because, well, it's ternary operator, the special case that everyone should know (otherwise it looks like a mess with ? and : operators).</div><div>`a ?? x + y + z` -- maybe. If not for analogies with || and && and knowing about @autoclosure, I'd say that priority of ?? should be very high.</div><div><br></div><div>Now that I think about it, if job of SE-0077 could be done with a linter, then... do we still need it?</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Well, I for one would veer conservative on this one and say that there is a place for precedence in operators, if only because the mathematical ones (the majority of them) are commonly used and unambiguous. I think SE-0077 raises some good points. But as to whether `a ?? x + y + z` should be forced to have parentheses, you have a point here that this might be territory for a linter.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><br></div><div>- Anton</div><span class=""><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2016-06-15 16:00 GMT+03:00 Vladimir.S <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:svabox@gmail.com" target="_blank">svabox@gmail.com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">As I understand, the question is if<br>
<br>
`a ?? x + y + z`<br>
and<br>
`a ? b : c + x + y`<br>
(or `b + c * d / e`)<br>
<br>
an "ambiguous case" ?<div><div><br>
<br>
On 15.06.2016 15:42, Антон Жилин via swift-evolution wrote:<br>
</div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div>
It's tempting to mention SE-0077 in this context. If it's accepted, we will<br>
be able to make omission of parentheses an error in ambiguous cases.<br>
<br>
- Anton<br>
<br>
<br></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
swift-evolution mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote></div><br></div></span></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
swift-evolution mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>