On 01.07.2016 0:17, Austin Zheng wrote:
#1 was discussed in this
thread: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.swift.evolution/16190.
According to Chris, "FWIW, Swift 1 supported tuple destructuring in
parameter lists, and we took it out to simplify the language and eliminate
special cases."
OK. Got it.
#2 may or may not naturally fall out of fixing the ambiguity. If it
doesn't, the proposal should definitely add it.
I just think that it is worth to mention how the function type with
multiply arguments represented currently.
For #3, I would personally take the same approach as when tuple splat and
explicit currying were removed: it's pretty easy to manually write a
wrapper to convert between the old form and new form, so explicit bridging
support isn't worthwhile:
func tupleize<T, U, V, R>(_ original: (T, U, V) -> R) -> ((T, U, V)) -> R {
return { x in
return original(x.0, x.1, x.2)
}
}
Currently there could be a lot of code that relies on current behavior, so
IMO we should provide a easy way to convert to Swift 3.0. I feel like
explicit bridging the best solution here.
But from other point of view, Swift 3 is source breaking release anyway and
one will just need to change tuple to list of parameters (or vice-versa) in
code to conform to correct type of function.
Best,
Austin
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Vladimir.S via swift-evolution
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Just want to brought some things/questions that was not reflected in
proposal and that I think should be mentioned:
1. Should we be able to have such syntax to de-couple tuple's values in
parameter of closure:
let a : ((Int, Int, Int)) -> Int = { ((x, y, z)) in return x + y + z }
or only as single parameter
let a : ((Int, Int, Int)) -> Int = { x in return x.0 + x.1 + x.2 }
2. Currently type of `(Int,Int)->()` is actually `((Int,Int))->()`
typealias t1 = (Int, Int) -> Int
print(t1.self) // ((Int, Int)) -> Int
the proposal should change this to:
print(t1.self) // (Int, Int) -> Int
where `((Int, Int)) -> Int` means one tuple argument
3. It seems like we should keep the ability to explicitly convert one
function type to another as some(many?) code can depend on this current
behavior and so we need a way to convert old code to new.
I.e. I think such construction should work:
var a : ((Int, Int, Int)) -> Int = { x in return x.0 + x.1 + x.2 }
a = { x, y, z in return x + y + z} as ((Int, Int, Int)) -> Int
and
var b : (Int, Int, Int) -> Int = { x, y, z in return x + y + z }
b = { x in return x.0 + y.1 + z.2} as (Int, Int, Int) -> Int
Opinions/thoughts?
On 30.06.2016 21:22, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution wrote:
Hello Swift community,
The review of "SE-0110: Distinguish between single-tuple and
multiple-argument function types" begins now and runs through July
4. The proposal is available here:
https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0110-distingish-single-tuple-arg.md
Reviews are an important part of the Swift evolution process. All
reviews should be sent to the swift-evolution mailing list at
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
or, if you would like to keep your feedback private, directly to
the review manager.
What goes into a review?
The goal of the review process is to improve the proposal under
review through constructive criticism and contribute to the
direction of Swift. When writing your review, here are some
questions you might want to answer in your review:
* What is your evaluation of the proposal?
* Is the problem being addressed significant enough to
warrant a change to Swift?
* Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction
of Swift?
* If you have used other languages or libraries with a
similar feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?
* How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a
quick reading, or an in-depth study?
More information about the Swift evolution process is available at
https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md
Thank you,
-Chris Lattner
Review Manager
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________
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
