> I'm unfamiliar with `tap` but it looks
> similar to method cascading, which is on hold for Swift 4.
I *am* familiar with `tap`. It's basically `with(_:update:)`, but as a method
and not `inout`, which usually doesn't matter for Ruby since everything is an
object in that language. Typically, though, `tap` is not used to mutate at all;
instead, it's used to access an intermediate value in a method chain, for
instance to log it.
I am very much in favor of `with(_:update:)`. Fundamentally, it is an operation
which applies a mutating method to a copy to make it nonmutating; this seems
like a very useful thing to have in the standard library. I could easily
imagine the standard library itself using it to reduce boilerplate. For
instance, if the FloatingPoint protocol currently offers this:
extension FloatingPoint {
func adding(_ other: Self) -> Self {
var selfCopy = self
selfCopy.add(other)
return selfCopy
}
}
`with(_:update:)` would allow us to instead shorten it to:
extension FloatingPoint {
func adding(_ other: Self) -> Self {
return with(self) { $0.add(other) }
}
}
I also think this is fairly future-proof. Many of the future proposals in this
area, like `self` shadowing, will interoperate with `with(_:update:)`
perfectly. Others, like method cascading, would supplant it in some uses, but
still leave many others (like the `FloatingPoint` example above) untouched. But
even without any other changes at all, this is a good, useful thing to have in
the language.
I don't agree with those who argue that this should be a method. When Swift
offers an operation on any instance, it very rarely does so as a member (and
`dynamicType`, one of the few exceptions, seems to be going away); instead, it
uses either a free function or an initializer on the result type, depending on
the circumstance. A `with(_:update:)` free function thus matches a broader
pattern in the language.
There are also implementation reasons not to go the method route. A free
function can be trivially implemented in the standard library with no language
changes at all. A method, on the other hand, would either have to be
implemented as a keyword specially recognized by the parser and handled by the
language (as `dynamicType` is), or would require us to allow the currently
forbidden extension of `Any`. Either of these is vastly more difficult and
risky than using a free function.
--
Brent Royal-Gordon
Architechies
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
