I think this would make more sense if we were to get more characters in
operators, such that we could also replace && with and, and || with or, this
way we could make not an operator and write expressions like so:
if foo and not bar { … }
Otherwise as others have said this seems strange as a method. If you don’t find
the leading exclamation mark very readable then you could instead do:
foo != true
It’s a few more characters, but it exists now and reads logically I think.
> On 21 May 2016, at 15:50, Антон Миронов via swift-evolution
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I found negation operator (!) the least detectable among the code. So I’ve
> decided to add property “not” to BooleanType (Swift 2.2) or Boolean on 3.0
> with extension:
>
> extension BooleanType {
> var not: Bool { return !self.boolValue }
> }
>
> This is code with negation operator:
> return !self.lanes[position.y][currentLaneRange].contains(.Gap)
>
> As I sad before negation operation is hard to spot. Moreover at first it
> looks like I’m trying to negate self for some reason.
>
> This is code with “not” property:
> return self.lanes[position.y][currentLaneRange].contains(.Gap).not
>
> Now it is easy to spot the statement I am actually getting negation of.
> On my experience negation operator can occasionally be missed while reading
> code. This happens less often with “not” property. So I’m proposing to add
> this property to standard library and prefer it in most cases.
>
> Thanks,
> Anton Mironov
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
