Sorry to hijack the thread, but I was working to fix the fact that we can't have optional unowned pointers in swift and Jordan said he didn't think anybody ever asked for it before. It made me worry about the kind of practices swift is encouraging.
The overhead of using weak pointers isn't massive, but it involves locking and updating global tables (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/23689155/lots-of-overhead-for-weak-property). Unowned pointers don't have this overhead, and can also help you detect errors because they are fail-deadly. But yeah, I'd like to be able to reference non-owning instance methods. This (https://itunes.apple.com/app/apple-store/id922793622?pt=814382&mt=8&ct=how_i_email) is how I Email now > > On Sep 14, 2016 at 7:45 am, <Rick Mann (mailto:[email protected])> > wrote: > > > > > > On Sep 13, 2016, at 22:34 , Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution > > <[email protected] (mailto:[email protected])> wrote: > > > > It's similar to Linus' argument against using kernel debuggers > > (https://lwn.net/2000/0914/a/lt-debugger.php3). Understanding your code at > > a level above the source, and being careful, make you a better developer. > > There are no features in swift which compensate for a lack of understanding > > about how your code works. > > Get off my lawn! > > > -- > Rick Mann > [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) > > >
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
