No one’s brought it up yet, but it seems totally reasonable. I’d even consider this a bug fix, not a real language change, but I’m not a core team member.
Jordan > On Apr 26, 2016, at 00:15, Aleksandar Petrovic via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Swift community, I have a question. > > This is a valid Swift code: > > func testFunc(times: Int, fn: ((Int)->Void)? = nil) { > guard let f = fn else { return } > for i in 1 ..< times { > f(i) > } > } > > And this is not: > > func testFunc(times: Int, @noescape fn: ((Int)->Void)? = nil) { > guard let f = fn else { return } > for i in 1 ..< times { > f(i) > } > } > > I can't think of any hard reason why the @noescape parameter of the function > can't be nullable (and, with default value, be optional), but maybe I'm > missing something. Is there any plan to correct this in 3.0? > > Alex > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
