<div dir="ltr">Not a big deal either way, but I prefer the 2nd (nil) form and therefore would like to see the 1st form go. It would make Swift more consistent, consider:<div><br></div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px">let o: Int? // Looks like nil is assigned.<br>if someTest {<br> o = 1 // Why isn't this an error? (OK I know why - but it looks odd.)<br>} else {<br> o = nil<br>}<br><br><br></blockquote>Whilst the above works it is weird because if you are aware that o: Int? normally assigns nil then the above looks like o, which is a let, is assigned to twice. If you do the equivalent of the above for a non-optional it is an error.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"> -- Howard.<br></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On 8 November 2017 at 07:54, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div id="m_-7996343717438270161bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px;color:rgba(0,0,0,1.0);margin:0px;line-height:auto">Same here, but I wouldn’t care much if it were gone.</div><div><div class="h5"> <br> <div id="m_-7996343717438270161bloop_sign_1510087959354830080" class="m_-7996343717438270161bloop_sign"></div> <br><p class="m_-7996343717438270161airmail_on">Am 7. November 2017 um 21:40:56, David Hart via swift-evolution (<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>) schrieb:</p> <blockquote type="cite" class="m_-7996343717438270161clean_bq"><span><div><div></div><div>Yeah, I use the first form constantly.<br><br>> On 6 Nov 2017, at 23:33, Slava Pestov via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br>> <br>> Hi all,<br>> <br>> Right now, the following two declarations are equivalent:<br>> <br>> struct S {<br>> var x: Int?<br>> }<br>> <br>> struct S {<br>> var x: Int? = nil<br>> }<br>> <br>> That is, mutable bindings of sugared optional type (but not Optional<T>!) always have a default value of ‘nil’. This feature increases the surface area of the language for no good reason, and I would like to deprecate it in -swift-version 5 with a short proposal. Does anyone feel strongly about giving it up? I suspect most Swift users don’t even know it exists.<br>> <br>> Slava<br>> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<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" target="_blank">https://lists.swift.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/swift-<wbr>evolution</a><br><br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<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" target="_blank">https://lists.swift.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/swift-<wbr>evolution</a><br></div></div></span></blockquote></div></div></div><br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<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/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/swift-<wbr>evolution</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>