> On Jul 11, 2016, at 9:12 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On Jul 11, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Jacob Bandes-Storch via swift-evolution >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> You'd have to unwrap it, or use the ??/==/!= operators: >> https://gist.github.com/jtbandes/9d88cc83ceceb6c62f38 >> <https://gist.github.com/jtbandes/9d88cc83ceceb6c62f38> >> >> I'd be okay with </<=/>/>= returning Bool?, as I suggested in an older email >> (which somehow didn't make it to gmane's archive, but it's quoted in some >> other messages >> <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.swift.evolution/10095>). I think it >> would be more convenient in some cases than unwrapping the individual values >> before comparing them. > > I’d be strongly opposed to those operator returning “Bool?”. Doing so would > prevent conforming to Comparable and would be extremely surprising. > > -Chris
I just pushed the current draft of the proposal: https://github.com/rudkx/swift-evolution/blob/eliminate-value-to-optional-coercion/proposals/0000-disallow-value-to-optional-coercion-in-operator-arguments.md <https://github.com/rudkx/swift-evolution/blob/eliminate-value-to-optional-coercion/proposals/0000-disallow-value-to-optional-coercion-in-operator-arguments.md> I haven’t addressed removal of the ordered comparison operators. I suspect this should be a separate proposal, but I can roll that into this one if it’s desired. I’ll update the proposal as the discussion continues until it’s selected for review. Mark > > _______________________________________________ > 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
