> On Jul 20, 2016, at 5:24 PM, Saagar Jha <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Sorry for the last email…I didn’t see your response.
>
> I realize that disallowing IUOs in parameters (but not as properties) is
> inconsistent, but IUOs for properties make sense: they must be set during
> initialization, but sometimes this isn’t possible. IUOs make it possible to
> use the property just as any other non-Optional one, provided the property is
> set before it is used (see the proposal). This kind of guarantee doesn’t work
> for function parameters and return values.
>
> As for IUOs for non-audited methods; why can’t they just all use Optional
> parameters? It should have the same behavior as before, since you can pass in
> both an Optional as well as a non-Optional even today.
Because an override of an unaudited method has to *use* the parameters.
-Chris
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
