> On Jun 29, 2016, at 2:06 PM, Xiaodi Wu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Stephen Canon via swift-evolution
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 29, 2016, at 1:10 PM, Matthew Johnson <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> My criticism of the 'toNearestOrGreatest' still stands though. I think this
>> name is misleading given the stated semantics. The name indicates "greater
>> value" not "greater magnitude" which are opposites in the case of negative
>> numbers.
>
> Yup, I agree. I think I originally suggested `toNearestTiesAway`. I’m not
> tied to that name specifically, but we should be clear that ties go away from
> zero, not up.
>
> Agreed; `toNearestOrAwayFromZero` is the most accurate and consistent
> description.
Worth noting that since this is the defaulted behavior, we can get away with a
wordy description.
– Steve
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
