The where clause is not a stylistic flourish because it is still best used to constrain conditions that are semantically related to conditions. Upon acceptance as now, there are no compiler checks that mandate any relationship.
The difference is that (1) coders will be allowed to move Boolean assertions out of where clauses when there is no relationship, and (2) they will be allowed to order the statements as desired. Under the current system, all boolean clauses must be conjoined and expressed as the first item of the list (except after availability clauses, as the one exception) -- E > On May 24, 2016, at 11:01 AM, Xiaodi Wu <[email protected]> wrote: > > With the implementation of your proposal, will there be anything that can be > written in where clauses that cannot be written after a comma (in the context > of guard statements specifically)? If not, does the where clause become > entirely a stylistic flourish? > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 11:57 Erica Sadun <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > There is no way I could figure out how to restrict Boolean assertions to > mentioned variables therefore I left where clauses entirely untouched. > I'd recommend people adopt in-house standards where Boolean assertions in > where clauses should be semantically tied to the condition > clause that introduces them. > > I will add this as a note. > > -- E > > >> On May 24, 2016, at 9:29 AM, Xiaodi Wu <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Does this proposal distinguish between "where clauses [...] restricted to a >> Boolean assertion tied to variables connected to the binding or pattern >> condition" and "unrelated Boolean assertions [that] should be allowed to >> stand on their own"? >> >> Or are both types of boolean assertions now permitted either following a >> comma or following a where clause?
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
