> On Oct 5, 2015, at 8:59 PM, Rick Mann <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Oct 5, 2015, at 18:47 , Charles Srstka <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >>> On Oct 5, 2015, at 8:19 PM, Rick Mann <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Oct 5, 2015, at 18:12 , Jens Alfke <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> NSURLComponents is a class, not a struct, so ‘url3’ is a reference, not a >>>> value, and ‘let’ just means you can’t reassign ‘url3’ to point to another >>>> object. >>> >>> But it wasn't allowed in the copy() case. >> >> That’s because it doesn’t *know* it’s a class in the copy() case. An >> AnyObject could be a class *or* a struct. The compiler errs on the side of >> caution. > > Huh. I continue to be bothered by the ambiguity/variability of "let"*. Is the > reference immutable or the thing it points to? I wish I could specify which > is important in the code I'm writing. And I'm not sure I like the different > treatment for structs, although I can accept it. > > *Okay, maybe it's not ambiguous, but it often seems to be the opposite of > what I want.
For reference types, the reference is what’s immutable (since a reference is what the variable represents). For value types, the value itself is what’s immutable (since the value is what the variable represents). It’s all in the name. Charles _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
