> On Jul 20, 2016, at 12:52 PM, Chris Lattner <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jul 19, 2016, at 3:46 PM, Saagar Jha <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> I have updated the proposal here >> <https://gist.github.com/saagarjha/f33fecd4576f40133b6469da942ef453>. Since >> this is a potentially a source breaking change, I’d like this to be >> considered for Swift 3; unless anyone has any issues with it, I’m going to >> push this to swift-evolution. > > Some comments: > - The syntax proposed would be *completely* unlike anything in Swift, and is > semantically changing things unrelated to the type. > - This proposal doesn’t work, and overly punishes IUOs. > > I recommend that we do not discuss this proposal, as it would not be a good > use of community time. Beyond the unworkability of this specific proposal, > in my personal opinion, there is nothing wrong with the T! syntax. Making it > significantly more verbose would be a very *bad* thing for the intended use > cases.
Hi Saagar, I’m sorry for the response above, I apparently misunderstood your early example to read it as putting the force unwrapping concept into the “forceUnwrapping” parameter label. I now see that your idea is to remove force unwrapping entirely for parameters. I am very concerned about this and think it would not be accepted into Swift. It makes the language less consistent (why can you do it on a property, but not a parameter) and eliminates important use cases for T!: overriding an non-nullability audited method. -Chris
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
