> On Oct 25, 2016, at 10:20 AM, Joe Groff via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > At this point in Swift's evolution, source-breaking changes to the language > require strong motivation. We can't really entertain superficial keyword > changes like this without overwhelming evidence that the existing syntax is > problematic in practice. `guard` has precedent in functional languages, for > instance in Haskell where the `guard` function is idiomatically used as part > of monadic `do`-notation computations, and has the same positive condition > semantics in those languages.
Right. Jay, I’m sorry if you or others find the name “guard” to be confusing, but there are many Swift developers that like it. I is almost inconceivable that we would change it at this point. -Chris _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
