Thanks for all replies.
This is helpful for introduce why for in be that for in other peoples.
나의 iPhone에서 보냄
2017. 7. 29. 05:14 Taylor Swift 작성:
> This is funny because this “expected behavior” is actually a heavily
> criticized part of C behavior. I think this change
The latest beta doesn’t allow you to append “()” to an enum name with no
associated value in a switch case.
This makes Swift less safe because appending that “()” is an excellent way to
indicate that you are not ignoring the associated value in the swift case
because there isn’t any.
Suppose
> On Jul 28, 2017, at 05:54, Omar Charif via swift-evolution
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I wonder whether there is already a way in Swift to compare a string against
> a large string array quickly without using the traditional ways of
> comparison.
>
> Say we have
This is funny because this “expected behavior” is actually a heavily
criticized part of C behavior. I think this change would cause just as much
if not more confusion than it alleviates.
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Kwanghoon Choi via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
>
This sounds like an interesting idea. The best way to promote this would be to
make a Swift package first, so that Swift users can use it right away and we
can see how it works in practice. If it has sufficient merit and general
applicability, then it makes sense to propose including it in the
> On 28 Jul 2017, at 17:19, Kwanghoon Choi via swift-evolution
> wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> I found someone easy mistake using for in loop statement.
>
> Ex)
> var i = 0
> for i in 0..<10 { }
> print(i)
>
> And this user expected print(i) is “10”
>
> Many experienced
I simply can’t see changing the syntax of such a fundamental construct,
especially when a suitable replacement, which accomplishes your desired goal of
introducing no new variables outside (visually) of a pair of curly braces,
already exists. The language’s development is well past the stage of
yes, swift already has forEach, but from my point of view, there is an
uncomfortable part, like '(0..<10).forEach{}'. like Range type to need wrap
it in parentheses for using forEach.
my suggestion is not replacing 'for in [] {}' to 'for [] {}'. Can not we
have both? Of course, by erasing one
This change would also make it so that for loops follow the same format as all
other closures with variables.
The downside is that this would break a TON of code. I don’t think that the
amount of code this breaks would be worth the consistency. And as Alex
mentioned, it is possible through
> On 28 Jul 2017, at 17:19, Kwanghoon Choi via swift-evolution
> wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> I found someone easy mistake using for in loop statement.
>
> Ex)
> var i = 0
> for i in 0..<10 { }
> print(i)
>
> And this user expected print(i) is “10”
The variable shadows
Hello
I found someone easy mistake using for in loop statement.
Ex)
var i = 0
for i in 0..<10 { }
print(i)
And this user expected print(i) is “10”
Many experienced swift developers doesn’t misunderstand like this. But always
someone is new comers, and I think this expression make
If you're doing something like that, you probably want to end up with some kind
of bloom filter.
Alex
> On 28 Jul 2017, at 13:54, Omar Charif via swift-evolution
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I wonder whether there is already a way in Swift to compare a string against
> a
Hi,
I wonder whether there is already a way in Swift to compare a string against a large string array quickly without using the traditional ways of comparison.
Say we have ["a", "b", "c", "d"] and we would like to find whether this array contains
"a", then we decide to check if we have "b"
13 matches
Mail list logo