Also didn't know `case _: ` works as `default`. So we have 2 things that do
exactly the same. Agree, that leaving `case _:` and removing 'default' will
increase the consistency of the language. I even think `case _:` is better
than `default` in any way. Don't agree that this case confuse anybody :
each language has its own special syntax features. If one will teach Swift
as first language - no problems at all, `case _: ` construction is very
simple and understandable. If one will teach Swift as next language, so
this person is professional enough to use `case _:` in Swift instead of
`default`, don't see any tragedy here.
But yes, I see that this is "commonly rejected proposal", so OK.
On 17.06.2016 23:54, Tony Allevato via swift-evolution wrote:
Agreed, it sounds like default should be treated as a contextual keyword in
this case.
It never even occurred to me that "case _:" would work as a replacement for
default, but it does even today—and now that I've seen it, it makes total
sense. I could definitely get behind a proposal to remove "default" as a
keyword from the language entirely in favor of that. It blends well with
other pattern matching. The only concern I would have would be about
discoverability, but it would be easy to have the compiler emit an error
when it sees default in a switch: "default is unsupported; use case _ instead."
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 1:45 PM E. Maloney via swift-evolution
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
While upgrading to Swift 3, I noticed that I had a few enums with cases
named .Default that, after being converted to lowercase, now need to be
rendered using the ugly .`default` notation.
I also noticed something similar while reading the docs for
NotificationCenter (the NSNotificationCenter replacement, that is, not
the NotificationCenter that governs the notification center UI);
“default” can’t be used as a function name without escaping, so the
declaration is:
class func `default`()
It seems to me that in the case of function names and enum cases, the
parser should be able to unambiguously distinguish between the Swift
keyword “default” and a user-defined name “default”, since IIRC the
keyword “default” can only be used in parameter lists for generated
headers and as the last item in a switch statement.
(Perhaps this is also another argument in favor of using “case _:” in
place of “default:” in a switch statement.)
What do you think? Is there any reason this *wouldn’t* be feasible?
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________
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
