I like the idea, but it is worth noting that unless the syntax is generalized (which I'm not necessarily against), the type of `operation` cannot be referenced. This means that you can't declare a variable of that type, unless you assign the argument to it.
Félix > Le 31 mai 2016 à 09:16:56, Erica Sadun via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> a écrit : > > Here's a function signature from some code from today: > > func scaleAndCropImage( > image: UIImage, > toSize size: CGSize, > fitImage: Bool = true > ) -> UIImage { > > > And here's what I want the function signature to actually look like: > > func scaleAndCropImage( > image: UIImage, > toSize size: CGSize, > operation: (.Fit | .Fill) = .Fit > ) -> UIImage { > > > where I don't have to establish a separate enumeration to include ad-hoc > enumeration-like semantics for the call. A while back, Yong hee Lee > introduced anonymous enumerations (and the possibility of anonymous option > flags) but the discussion rather died. > > I'm bringing it up again to see whether there is any general interest in > pursuing this further as I think the second example is more readable, > appropriate, and Swifty than the first, provides better semantics, and is > more self documenting. > > Thanks for your feedback, > > -- Erica > > _______________________________________________ > 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
