Is there a bug tracking the remaining part of the implementation? Shouldn’t the proposal still be under “Not yet implemented” as its not completely implemented?
David. > On 21 Jun 2016, at 22:22, Joe Groff <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Jun 21, 2016, at 1:06 PM, David Hart via swift-evolution >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Just saw this article about IUO in Swift 3.0: >> >> https://www.bignerdranch.com/blog/wwdc-2016-increased-safety-in-swift-3/ >> >> I was surprised that the IUO type still exists. From what I understood, >> SE-0054 gives a clear example that: >> >> func f() -> Int! { return 3 } >> // f: () -> Int?, has IUO attribute >> // ... >> >> let x3: Int! = f() >> // succeeds; x3: Int? = .some(3), has IUO attribute >> // ... >> >> func g() -> Int! { return nil } >> // f: () -> Int?, has IUO attribute >> // ... >> >> let y3: Int! = g() // succeeds; y3: Int? = .none, has IUO attribute >> >> x3 and y3 should be a of type Int? but trying those out in Xcode 8’s beta 1 >> playground show that they are still of type Int!. Did I miss something? > > SE-0054 hasn't been fully implemented yet. The stricter implicit promotions > are mostly there, but the IUO type still exists. > > -Joe
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
