> On Jan 2, 2016, at 12:13 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Why should we absolutely add methods with unclear meanings or behavior, when >> there are already perfectly clear, if verbose, alternatives? >> seq.generate().next() may not be nice, but no one can get fooled by it. > > Well, for one thing, because it doesn't work. You can't call a mutating > method directly on a return value without assigning it to a variable first. > And put simply, a temporary variable seems a bridge too far to me.
For a possibly-mutating operation, I think it’s perfectly appropriate that you have to create an intermediate variable. If you want to create an extension with a “func possiblyConsumeFirst() -> Generator.Element”, you are welcome to do so; that’s what extensions are for. IMO the standard library should not hide volatile sequence consumption under a property access. If I don’t sound sympathetic, it’s because nobody has shown a use-case for this functionality, and until I see one I am going to have a hard time believing there’s a problem worth solving. If you want to make the case that we need something like this, please show me why. -Dave _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
