> Brent Royal-Gordon: If, as seems likely for lens support, we eventually
> supported inout functions:
>
> func foo(x: Int) -> inout String {
> get { return myStr }
> set { myStr = newValue }
> }
>
> Would you feel differently about having `:` on subscript returns? Or would
> you want to use `:` on inout functions, too?
Since I haven’t used lenses
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bidirectional_transformation> and had to look
them up, I’m really not entitled to an opinion on this. But it’s an interesting
question.
To the extent that one conceptualizes lenses as having a “natural" inherent
directionality, it seems desirable for the declaration to express that. So at
first glance, -> doesn’t seem out of place here.
Garth
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
