Slightly related to this, I would really love to have non-subscript
parameterized properties. It would allow us to write
button.image(for: .normal) = image
instead of
button.setImage(image, for: .normal)
The same can be achieved through subscripts, but it’s not always as nice. It
would bring subscripts and computed properties closer together, which also
seems to be the goal of your proposal. Perhaps the two ideas could be combined?
> Subscripts are a hybrid of properties and functions, since they have a
> parameter list, as well as getters and setters, so use of either symbol will
> be unusual in this case.
>
> However, I think a colon is more suitable, since it implies the possibility
> to set the value.
>
>
> In the future, if we add throwing getters/ setters:
>
> subscript(_ position: Int) ->Element {
> get {
> return …
> }
> throwing set {
> …
> }
> }
>
> Should this require ‘throws ->Element’? Using a colon also removes this
> potentially confusing case.
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
