On 06/26/2016 09:10 PM, Christopher Kornher via swift-evolution wrote: > The core proposal: > —————— > > Closures capturing object references should automatically capture all > object references as weak. In my code, most closures are used in a functional programming capacity, e.g. with map(), reduce, etc. Hence, most closures are non-escaping and local, where strong capture is the desired way. Otherwise I would have to litter everything with optional unwrapping or add the explicit capture definition which would both make the code less readable in my opinion. > 1) Closures with object references could be simplified further by > implicitly including ‘let’ guards for all object references: This sounds good for closures without return value, but how would you handle closures with non-optional non-void return values? Also I think that explicit error handling in case of "expired" objects is safer than silent failure (by not executing the closure).
Kind regards, Manuel _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
