<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="">Hi all,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">this is a rather minor nitpick, I'm just looking for some opinions on this.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Declaring a function that has default parameters currently looks like this:</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 11px; line-height: normal; font-family: Menlo;" class=""><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures; color: #ba2da2" class="">func</span><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures" class=""> foo(bar: </span><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures; color: #703daa" class="">String</span><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures" class=""> = </span><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures; color: #d12f1b" class="">"baz"</span><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures" class="">) {</span></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 11px; line-height: normal; font-family: Menlo;" class=""><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures" class=""> </span><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures; color: #3e1e81" class="">print</span><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures" class="">(bar)</span></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 11px; line-height: normal; font-family: Menlo;" class=""><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures" class="">}</span></div></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Now I'm wondering if there would be any problems if it were possible to omit the type annotation for default params and let Swift's type inference handle that. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 11px; line-height: normal; font-family: Menlo;" class=""><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures" class=""><span style="color: rgb(186, 45, 162);" class="">func</span> foo(bar = </span><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures; color: #d12f1b" class="">"baz"</span><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures" class="">) {</span></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 11px; line-height: normal; font-family: Menlo;" class=""><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures" class=""> </span><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures; color: rgb(62, 30, 129);" class="">print</span><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures;" class="">(bar)</span></div><div style="margin: 0px; font-size: 11px; line-height: normal; font-family: Menlo;" class=""><span style="font-variant-ligatures: no-common-ligatures" class="">}</span></div></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">It feels to be equivalent to omitting type annotations with variable declarations. Obviously more complex types would still require annotations being specified. Off the top of my head I can't think of any negative ramifications this might bring, be it in simple function/method declarations or protocol extensions and elsewhere. </div><div class="">Any further input on this would be much appreciated :)</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Cheers,</div><div class="">Kilian</div><div class=""><br class=""></div></body></html>