Sent from my iPad
On May 27, 2016, at 6:15 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution
<swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
>> The idea is simple:
>>
>> • Can we make return keyword optional in cases like this?
>> • Shouldn’t this behave like @autoclosure or @noescape?
>
> This actually doesn't have anything to do with @autoclosure or @noescape. Any
> one-expression closure can omit the `return` statement and have an inferred
> return type.
>
>> type A {
>> var characters: [Character] = …
>> var string: String { String(self.characters) }
>> var count: Int { 42 }
>> }
>
> Despite those inaccuracies, I do think that it's a good idea to permit
> single-expression accessors to omit the `return` statement; it will make them
> much less clunky. I would even extend this to cases where you use the `get`
> keyword:
>
> var string: String {
> get { String(self.characters) }
> set { characters = Array(newValue.characters) }
> }
+1. And in single-expression functions as well. This is something that should
be consistent and allowed everywhere in the language.
>
> --
> Brent Royal-Gordon
> Architechies
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution@swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
