+1 My sentiments exactly. As I was catching up on this thread, this was almost exactly the syntax I was already considering mentioning when I encountered Erica's reply.
I don't know whether it will meet all requirements; however, from a readability perspective in both declarations and function type signatures, this syntax is the first of the suggestions that feels clear to me. -- Tahoma > On Dec 21, 2015, at 11:20 AM, Ricardo Parada via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On Dec 19, 2015, at 4:10 PM, Erica Sadun <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> What would the ramifications of the following be? Each addresses the >> "confusable with labeling" issue but preserve the inout keyword. >> >> func foo(x: inout Int) >> ... > > I think I like this one better than all the others. > I have not analyzed all the implications of having it there but it feels > right. > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
