on Mon Apr 25 2016, Xiaodi Wu <xiaodi.wu-AT-gmail.com> wrote: > Me: > > Unless the functions also return an error, mutating/non-mutating pairs > of functions return Void/Self (or maybe Optional<Self>) respectively. > Are there other possibilities? But Swift is pretty unique among > C-family languages in allowing overloaded functions that differ only > by return type. Besides the loss of clarity to the reader at the call > site, what are downsides of simply naming both functions exactly the > same in today's Swift syntax? > > You: > > I don't think it's really worth exploring much further once you > acknowledge the loss of clarity to the reader at the call site ;-) > > (I think the smiley really seals the deal in terms of definitiveness of > rejection, no?)
Hey, that was just my opinion at the time; that doesn't mean the community rejected the idea or the core team rejected the idea [or even that I still believe the same thing this week ;-)] -- Dave _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
