I’m -1 as it’s currently written, for the following reasons:

1. Differences are introduced to pattern matching in different parts of the 
language (`switch` vs `if`/`guard` vs `for`).

2. Exclusion of `for` in the proposal is either deliberate (which relates to 
point 1.) or done as a result of a rush, which is not good either. This 
proposal should include a resolution for `for case let where` clauses.

3. Syntatic sugar of optional matching `let x? ~= maybeX` feels completely out 
of place and looks nothing like standard optional bindings. I will remain 
strongly against this change.

– Adrian

_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Reply via email to