> On Mar 31, 2016, at 11:43 PM, Fabian Ehrentraud > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Great to hear IUOs losing ground :-) > > Might adding additional compiler warnings as described in SR-104 accompany > the implementation of this proposal well? > https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-104 <https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-104> This is definitely related, but orthogonal to SE-0054.
Just MHO, but I think warning on every implicit unwrap would completely defeat the point of having the T! feature in the first place: if that were the model we wanted, we would just import unaudited pointers as optional. Doing that has been extensively discussed and is not a good idea. -Chris > > Fabian > > >> On 31.03.2016, at 18:43, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Proposal Link: >> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0054-abolish-iuo.md >> >> <https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0054-abolish-iuo.md> >> >> The review of SE-0054 "Abolish ImplicitlyUnwrappedOptional type" ran from >> Mar 25…30, 2016. The proposal has been *accepted, pending implementation >> experience*: >> >> There is generally positive feedback on the proposal, as it keeps the good >> behaviors of the existing T! type syntax (including support for importing >> un-nullability-audited APIs, support for 2-phase initialization patterns, >> etc) while dramatically reducing the confusion and surprise that they >> introduce as they trickle through type inference. The core team sees >> significant value in having a simple and predictable model that can be >> explained concisely. >> >> That said, this is the sort of proposal that can have a profound impact on >> the actual experience using unaudited APIs. The core team believes that the >> experience will be good, but we would like to get some experience moving a >> couple of existing projects (both low-level code that interacts with C, and >> an “App” project working with high level frameworks) to see what the impact >> is in practice. If something unexpected comes up, we will revisit this, and >> potentially reject it later. Chris Willmore is working on an implementation >> of this now, so we should know in the next week or two. >> >> Thank you to Chris Willmore for driving this forward! >> >> -Chris Lattner >> Review Manager >> _______________________________________________ >> swift-evolution mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
