> On Jul 28, 2016, at 10:19 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > -= Maybe it’s not too late =- > For the moment the classical for ;; could simply > remain activated (Yes) in 3.0. because:
I don't understand why you keep on complaining about this. For the record, I too think getting rid of the C-style for loop was a mistake, and there are a number of other proposals whose outcomes are not ones I would have personally preferred. However, 1. There is a well-defined process through which all changes to the Swift language must go, laid out in the swift-evolution repository's documentation from the first day Swift became an open-source project. 2. That process includes feedback and review from both the community and the Swift core engineers, and often multiple rounds of discussion. 3. The process doesn't work if we disregard its outcomes simply because we don't like them, or if we allow interminable chains of back-and-forth proposals because people on one side of issue X simply cannot accept a particular decision. The technical aspects of the C-style for loop and its proposed replacements have already been discussed ad nauseam on this list and in other places, so I won't touch on them. Best regards, Austin > > - It doesn’t conflict at all with all other language elements,
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
