The only thing that really bugs me about subscript is that you declare it with
(), but use it with []. I’ve never found the return indicator to be confusing
here. I get the argument in favor of property-ness, though.
Wouldn’t mind considering using square brackets instead, but perhaps that has
already been tried and rejected at some point:
subscript[_ position: Int] -> {}
l8r
Sean
> On Jul 11, 2016, at 2:32 PM, James Froggatt via swift-evolution
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Interesting way to think of the ‘->’ operator.
>
> Perhaps a <-> operator could represent this two-way mapping?
>
>> On 11 Jul 2016, at 20:29, Erica Sadun <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 11, 2016, at 1:21 PM, James Froggatt via swift-evolution
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks for letting me know this has been tried before, I'm actually in the
>>> process of drafting the proposal now.
>>
>> I'd hesitate to try to do something off-beat and "blend" them but it amuses
>> me no end that the :-> operator looks so very happy.
>>
>> subscript(_ position: Int) inout :-> Element { get { … } set { … } }
>>
>> Nonetheless, I do want to point out that unlike properties, subscripts
>> provide a mapping between a domain and a range so it feels more natural to
>> me to use -> than :.
>>
>> -- E
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
