<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">I realize that, which is why I’m strongly against this proposal. I could potentially be for adding the `??` overload temporarily, but I don’t really feel it is necessary either.<div class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jun 28, 2017, at 2:55 PM, Adrian Zubarev <<a href="mailto:adrian.zubarev@devandartist.com" class="">adrian.zubarev@devandartist.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="bloop_markdown" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(254, 254, 254);"><p style="margin: 15px 0px; -webkit-margin-before: 0px;" class="">Besides all that<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><code style="font-family: Menlo, Consolas, 'Liberation Mono', Courier, monospace; font-size: 10pt; border-top-left-radius: 3px; border-top-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-left-radius: 3px; background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248); color: inherit; border: 1px solid rgb(234, 234, 234); margin: 0px 2px; padding: 0px 5px; word-break: normal; word-wrap: normal; -webkit-margin-before: 0px;" class="">Never</code><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>as a bottom type means that you can use<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><code style="font-family: Menlo, Consolas, 'Liberation Mono', Courier, monospace; font-size: 10pt; border-top-left-radius: 3px; border-top-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-left-radius: 3px; background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248); color: inherit; border: 1px solid rgb(234, 234, 234); margin: 0px 2px; padding: 0px 5px; word-break: normal; word-wrap: normal;" class="">fatalError()</code><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>literally everywhere not only on the RHS of<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><code style="font-family: Menlo, Consolas, 'Liberation Mono', Courier, monospace; font-size: 10pt; border-top-left-radius: 3px; border-top-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-left-radius: 3px; background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248); color: inherit; border: 1px solid rgb(234, 234, 234); margin: 0px 2px; padding: 0px 5px; word-break: normal; word-wrap: normal;" class="">??</code>.</p><pre style="margin: 15px 0px; font-family: Menlo, Consolas, 'Liberation Mono', Courier, monospace; font-size: 10pt; border-top-left-radius: 3px; border-top-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-left-radius: 3px; background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248); color: inherit; border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); overflow: auto; padding: 4px 8px; word-break: normal; word-wrap: normal;" class=""><code style="font-family: Menlo, Consolas, 'Liberation Mono', Courier, monospace; font-size: 10pt; border-top-left-radius: 3px; border-top-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-left-radius: 3px; background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248); color: inherit; border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; word-break: normal; word-wrap: normal; -webkit-margin-before: 0px;" class="">func foo(_: Int) {}
foo(fatalError())
</code></pre><p style="margin: 15px 0px;" class="">That said, we can kill our application everywhere we would ever imagine, regardless of whether there is<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><code style="font-family: Menlo, Consolas, 'Liberation Mono', Courier, monospace; font-size: 10pt; border-top-left-radius: 3px; border-top-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-left-radius: 3px; background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248); color: inherit; border: 1px solid rgb(234, 234, 234); margin: 0px 2px; padding: 0px 5px; word-break: normal; word-wrap: normal; -webkit-margin-before: 0px;" class="">?</code><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>or<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><code style="font-family: Menlo, Consolas, 'Liberation Mono', Courier, monospace; font-size: 10pt; border-top-left-radius: 3px; border-top-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-right-radius: 3px; border-bottom-left-radius: 3px; background-color: rgb(248, 248, 248); color: inherit; border: 1px solid rgb(234, 234, 234); margin: 0px 2px; padding: 0px 5px; word-break: normal; word-wrap: normal;" class="">!</code><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>operator present somewhere.</p><div style="margin: 15px 0px;" class=""><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div></div><div class="bloop_original_html" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(254, 254, 254);"><div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 13px; margin: 0px;" class=""><br class=""></div><br class=""><div id="bloop_sign_1498686691508059904" class="bloop_sign"><div style="font-family: helvetica, arial; font-size: 13px;" class="">-- <br class="">Adrian Zubarev<br class="">Sent with Airmail</div></div><br class=""><p class="airmail_on" style="margin: 15px 0px;">Am 28. Juni 2017 um 23:50:18, Jaden Geller via swift-evolution (<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>) schrieb:</p><blockquote type="cite" class="clean_bq" style="margin: 15px 0px;"><span style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;" class=""><div class="" style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><div class=""></div><div class="">I’m strongly against not using the `??` operator for `x ?? fatalError()` since that is naturally what will be possible once the `Never` type is a real bottom type. If you want to use `!!` for the `x !! “bad things!”` convenience form, I don’t care. But the `Never` form should definitely, definitely use `??`.<div class=""><br class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="" style="margin: 15px 0px;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px;">On Jun 28, 2017, at 1:30 PM, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="" style="margin-bottom: 0px;"><div class="" style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><div class="">Based on the feedback on this thread, I'm coming to the following conclusions:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">`!!` sends the<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">right semantic message</i>. "Unwrap or die" is an unsafe operation. It is based on `!`, the unsafe forced unwrap operator, and not on `??`, the safe fallback nil-coalescing operator. Its symbology should therefore follow `!` and not `?`. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The `!!` operator should follow the same semantics as `<font face="Menlo" class="" style="font-size: 11px;">Optional.unsafelyUnwrapped</font>`, which establishes a precedent for this approach:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><blockquote class="" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;">> "<i class="">The unsafelyUnwrapped property provides the same value as the forced unwrap operator (postfix !). However, in optimized builds (-O), no check is performed to ensure that the current instance actually has a value. Accessing this property in the case of a nil value is a serious programming error and could lead to undefined behavior or a runtime error.</i>"</div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">By following `<font face="Menlo" class="" style="font-size: 9px;">Optional.unsafelyUnwrapped</font>`, this approach is consistent with<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><a href="https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/docs/ErrorHandlingRationale.rst#logic-failures" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">https://github.com/apple/swift/blob/master/docs/ErrorHandlingRationale.rst#logic-failures</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><blockquote class="" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;"><i class=""><span class="" style="font-family: Palatino-Roman;">> "Logic failures are intended to be handled by fixing the code. It means </span><span class="" style="font-family: Palatino-Roman;">checks of logic failures can be removed if the code is tested enough.</span><br class="" style="font-family: Palatino-Roman;"><span class="" style="font-family: Palatino-Roman;">Actually checks of logic failures for various operations, `!`, </span><span class="" style="font-family: Palatino-Roman;">`array[i]`, `&+` and so on, are designed and implemented to be removed</span><br class="" style="font-family: Palatino-Roman;"><span class="" style="font-family: Palatino-Roman;">when we use `-Ounchecked`. It is useful for heavy computation like </span><span class="" style="font-family: Palatino-Roman;">image processing and machine learning in which overhead of those </span><span class="" style="font-family: Palatino-Roman;">checks is not permissible."</span></i></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The right hand side should use a string (or more properly a string autoclosure) in preference to using a `<font face="Menlo" class="" style="font-size: 11px;">Never</font>` bottom type or a `<font face="Menlo" class="" style="font-size: 11px;">() -> Never</font>` closure. A string provides the cleanest user experience, and allows the greatest degree of self-documentation. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">- A string is cleaner and more readable to type. It respects DRY, and avoids using *both* the operator and the call to `fatalError` or `preconditionFailure` to signal an unsafe condition:</div><blockquote class="" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;"><span class="" style="font-family: Menlo; font-size: 11px;">`let last = array.last !! “Array guaranteed non-empty" // readable`</span></div></blockquote><div class="">than: </div><blockquote class="" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px;"><span class="" style="font-family: Menlo; font-size: 11px;">`let last = array.last !! fatalError(“Array </span><span class="" style="font-family: Menlo; font-size: 11px;">guaranteed</span><span class="" style="font-family: Menlo; font-size: 11px;"> non-empty”) // redundant, violates DRY`</span></div><div class="" style="margin-bottom: 0px;"><br class=""></div></blockquote><div class="">- A string allows the operator *<i class="">itself</i>* to unsafely fail, just as the unary version of `!` does now. It does this with additional feedback to the developer during testing, code reading, and code maintenance. The string provides a self-auditing in-line annotation of the reason why the forced unwrap has been well considered, using a language construct to support this.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">- A string disallows a potentially unsafe `Never` call that does not reflect a serious programming error, for example:</div><blockquote class="" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;"><span class="" style="font-family: Menlo; font-size: 11px;">let last = array.last !! f() // where </span><span class="" style="font-family: Menlo; font-size: 11px;">func f() -> Never { while true {} }</span></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">- Although as several list members mention, a `Never` closure solution is available today in Swift, so is the `!!` operator solution. Neither one requires a fundamental change to the language.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">- Pushing forward on this proposal does not in any way reflect on adopting the still-desirable `Never` bottom type.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="" style="margin: 15px 0px;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px;">On Jun 28, 2017, at 12:42 PM, Tony Allevato via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="" style="margin-bottom: 0px;"><div dir="ltr" class=""><br class=""><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="">On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:15 AM Dave DeLong <<a href="mailto:delong@apple.com" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">delong@apple.com</a>> wrote:<br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;"><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="" style="margin: 15px 0px;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px;">On Jun 28, 2017, at 10:44 AM, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="m_-2274859510633634742Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="" style="margin-bottom: 0px;"><div class="">Well the main debate is that, we all want early access to a feature that will be part of Swift as soon as `Never` becomes the bottom type. When this happens the `??` will automatically support the pitched behavior. Until then if we all agree that we should add it now in a way that will not break anything we can simply add an overload to `??` as I previously showed.<div class=""><br class=""></div></div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div></div></div><div class="" style="margin-bottom: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;"><div class=""><div class="">I believe we should add it now, but I like the recent observation that making<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><font face="Menlo" class=""><span class="" style="font-size: 11px;">??</span></font><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>suddenly become a potentially crashing operator violates the expectation that<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><font face="Menlo" class=""><span class="" style="font-size: 11px;">?</span></font><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>is an indication of safety.</div></div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">?? does *not* become a potentially crashing operator. The *fatalError* (or whatever else the user chooses to put there) on the right-hand side is the crashing operation.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;"><div class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">On the other hand, the existing semantics of Swift are that<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><font face="Menlo" class=""><span class="" style="font-size: 11px;">!</span></font><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>is always dangerous, so making<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><font face="Menlo" class=""><span class="" style="font-size: 11px;">!!</span></font><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>be the a potentially crashing operator is much more consistent with the language.</div></div></div><div class="" style="word-wrap: break-word;"><div class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="" style="margin: 15px 0px;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;"><div class=""><div class="">There is no need for `!!` because it will fade in the future. If you think of `Never` as a bottom type now then `??` will already make total sense. The default value for T from rhs might be T or Never. </div></div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div></div></div><div class="" style="word-wrap: break-word;"><div class=""><div class="">I respectfully disagree with your absolute position on this topic. Even with<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><font face="Menlo" class=""><span class="" style="font-size: 11px;">Never</span></font><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>as a bottom type in the future, it would<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i class="">still</i> be more convenient for me to type:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><font face="Menlo" class=""><span class="" style="font-size: 11px;">let last = array.last !! “Array must be non-empty"</span></font></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">… than it ever would be to type:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><font face="Menlo" class=""><span class="" style="font-size: 11px;">let last = array.last ?? fatalError(“Array must be non-empty”)</span></font></div></div></div><div class="" style="margin-bottom: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;"><div class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div></div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">There is a very high bar for additions to the standard library—a new operator added to the language is going to be around (1) forever, or (2) indefinitely with some migration cost to users if it's ever removed. Shaving off a few keystrokes doesn't quite meet that bar—especially when an alternative has been shown to work already that provides the same functionality, is more general (not coupled to fatalError or String messages), and that fits better into Swift's design.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">To make sure I'm not being too much of a downer, I would completely support this broader feature being implemented by that alternative: the ?? + autoclosure () -> Never combo. Then once Never does become a true bottom type, I believe it could be removed and the calling code would still *just work*.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;"><div class=""><div class=""></div><div class="">Dave</div></div></div><div class="" style="margin-bottom: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;"><div class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="" style="margin: 15px 0px;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;"><div class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">@erica: the rhs argument should be called something like `noreturnOrError` and not `defaultValue`. And we should keep in mind that when Never becomes the bottom type we have to remove that overload from stdlib, because otherwise it will be ambiguous. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">---</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">On the other hand if we tackle a different operator then we should rething the 'default value operator' because the second ? signals an optional but not a non-optional or an inplicit unwrapped operator. In that case I personally thing ?! would make more sense. Unwrap or (non-optional | IUO | trap/die)<br class=""><br class=""><div class="m_-2274859510633634742bloop_sign"><div class="" style="font-family: helvetica, arial; font-size: 13px;">-- <br class="">Adrian Zubarev<br class="">Sent with Airmail</div></div><p class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 15px 0px;">Am 28. Juni 2017 um 18:13:18, Tony Allevato via swift-evolution (<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>) schrieb:</p><blockquote type="cite" class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 15px 0px;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;"><div class=""></div><div class=""><div class=""><div class=""><span class="">It's hard for me to articulate, but "foo !! message" feels a little too much like a Perl-ism for my taste. Objectively that's not a great criticism on its own, but I just don't like the "smell" of an operator that takes a value on one side and a string for error reporting purposes on the other. It doesn't feel like it fits the style of Swift. I prefer a version that makes the call to fatalError (and thus, any other non-returning handler) explicitly written out in code.<br class=""><br class="">So, if the language can already support this with ?? and autoclosure/Never as was shown above, I'd rather see that added to the language instead of a new operator that does the same thing (and is actually less general).</span></div></div><div class=""><div class=""><span class=""><br class=""></span><div class="gmail_quote"><div class=""><span class="">On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 8:52 AM Jacob Williams via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br class=""></span></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;"><div class=""><span class="">I feel that the !! operator would be necessary for indicating that if this fails then something went horribly wrong somewhere and we should throw the fatalError. This allows the inclusion of optimizations using -Ounchecked and is clear that this is an operation that could result in a runtime error just like force unwrapping.</span></div><div class=""><span class=""><br class=""></span></div><div class=""><span class="">If we want code clarity and uniformity, then I think !! Is much better than ?? because it goes right along with the single ! Used for force unwrapping. However, this does depend on if the operator would be returning some kind of error that would cause the program to exit.</span></div><div class=""><span class=""><br class=""></span></div><div class=""><span class="">I think the ?? operator should not cause a program to exit early. It goes against optional unwrapping principles. I think code could get very confusing if some ? would return nil/a default value, and others would be causing your program to crash and exit. The ? operators should always be classified as safe operations.</span></div></div><div class="" style="word-wrap: break-word;"><div class=""><span class=""><br class=""></span><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="" style="margin: 15px 0px;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px;"><span class="">On Jun 28, 2017, at 9:41 AM, Ben Cohen via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</span></div><span class=""><br class="m_-2274859510633634742m_2866777249939610229m_1922728200947037084Apple-interchange-newline"></span><div class="" style="margin-bottom: 0px;"><div class="" style="word-wrap: break-word;"><span class=""><br class=""></span><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="" style="margin: 15px 0px;"><div class="" style="margin-top: 0px;"><span class="">On Jun 28, 2017, at 8:27 AM, David Hart via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</span></div><span class=""><br class="m_-2274859510633634742m_2866777249939610229m_1922728200947037084Apple-interchange-newline"></span><div class="" style="margin-bottom: 0px;"><span class=""><span class="" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;">Count me in as a strong proponent of ?? () -> Never. We don't need to burden the language with an extra operator just for that.</span><br class="m_-2274859510633634742m_2866777249939610229m_1922728200947037084Apple-interchange-newline"></span></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">You could say the same about ??</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The concern that an additional operator (and one that, IMO, fits well into existing patterns) is so burdensome seems way overweighted in this discussion IMO. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Adding the operator, and encouraging its use, will help foster better understanding of optionals and legitimate use of force-unwrapping in a way that I don’t think `?? fatalError` could.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div>_______________________________________________<br class="">swift-evolution mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class=""><a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" target="_blank" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></div>_______________________________________________<br class="">swift-evolution mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class=""><a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br class="" style="margin-bottom: 0px;"></blockquote></div></div></div>_______________________________________________<br class="">swift-evolution mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class=""><a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" target="_blank" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br class=""></div></div></blockquote></div></div>_______________________________________________<br class="">swift-evolution mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class=""><a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" target="_blank" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br class=""></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div></div>_______________________________________________<br class="">swift-evolution mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class=""><a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div>_______________________________________________<br class="">swift-evolution mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class=""><a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;" class="">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div>_______________________________________________<br class="">swift-evolution mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class=""><a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" style="color: rgb(65, 131, 196); background-color: inherit; text-decoration: none;" class="">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br class=""></div></div></span></blockquote></div><div class="bloop_markdown" style="font-family: Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(254, 254, 254);"></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>