> On Mar 15, 2016, at 10:41 AM, Jordan Rose via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thank you! I realized one other potential flaw in the data-gathering: your > search for "func foo(_ bar" will match both Objective-C methods and C > functions. I'm not sure CF should really be contributing to the scores. > Unfortunately the main way I can think of to differentiate them is by > indentation, which seems a little sketchy. > > Still, the conclusions I would draw from this are that the vast majority of > methods fall into one of the three following categories: > > - No arguments.
No harm, no foul situation. > - Empty first argument label. Change would primarily affect adding "_ ", two characters > - First argument label that does not match the parameter name. No harm, no foul situation. I still feel that adding consistency outweighs the inconvenience of the two extra characters, which then show an *intent* that the argument label is empty by choice rather than convention. -- E > This doesn't mean we shouldn't change the convention—"_ completionHandler" is > much easier to type than "completionHandler completionHandler", and it's > still removing complexity—but it does mean (to me) that the new API naming > guidelines don't make the "matching" case more important; they only make the > "no label" case less important. > > Jordan
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
