> On Dec 19, 2015, at 7:51 PM, Kevin Ballard via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > -1 > > The standard library is not representative of how closures are commonly used. > Notably, the standard library never executes anything asynchronously (an > extremely common use of closures in apps), doesn't ever hold closures that > are triggered later by a separate event (e.g. NSNotificationCenter observing, > or UIAlertView handlers, or any third-party solution for block-based > target/action replacement), no timers, no completion handlers, etc. The only > constructs in the standard library that come to mind that would need escaping > closures are lazy sequence operations and AnySequence (I haven't actually > looked to see if there are any others). But nearly all uses of closures in > UIKit require escaping, nearly all uses of closures in libdispatch require > escaping, and I wager that nearly all uses of closures in application code > require escaping.
Those are fair points. The right place to look is in application code so my skimming of the library was probably not that relevant. The fact that the compiler would tell you when you need @escaping but doesn’t tell you when you could add @noescape is part of what prompted my pitch. If we don’t change the default maybe we should at least add a warning when you *could* add @noescape but didn’t. A lot of folks are likely to leave it off when they should really be adding it. It would be interesting to look at function arguments in application code written in different styles (OO vs mixed vs functional-leaning) and see what the split is for escaping vs non-escaping function arguments. > > -Kevin Ballard > > On Sat, Dec 19, 2015, at 12:10 PM, Matthew Johnson via swift-evolution wrote: >> @noescape is safer because it does not require thinking about lifetime >> issues for captured objects. My hunch was that @noescape (or @autoclosure >> with implies @noescape) is also more common. I had a look through the >> standard library and this is definitely the case there. >> >> What does everyone think about making @noescape the default and introducing >> @escaping (or something similar) to annotate function arguments that do >> escape the call stack? >> >> Matthew >> _______________________________________________ >> swift-evolution mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
