I just realized my mistake in the example, I've corrected it > On 08 Jan 2017, at 07:45, Carlos García <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Rod, > > Maybe I’m not explain correctly in email. The change is not a "guard let” > replacement, instead it is a “if let” replacement. > > Best, > Carlos > > >> On 08 Jan 2017, at 07:22, Rod Brown <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> -1. >> >> Your proposal seems to confuse something we already have in the language to >> handle unwrapping and guarding, to only proceed if the item is non-null: >> Guard. >> >> We already have a keyword and behaviour that you specify in the “guard” >> behaviour. >> >> Additionally, changing “guard” to be “obtain” would require “obtain” to be >> signficantly better than the “guard” wording - instead, it is significantly >> worse. >> >> >> >>> On 8 Jan 2017, at 1:46 pm, Carlos García via swift-evolution >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Here’s a draft proposal to change if let construction for obtain let. >>> Proposal is at: >>> https://github.com/carlosypunto/swift-evolution/blob/obtain-let-instead-if-let/proposals/XXXX-Use-obtain-let-instead-if-let-constructions.md >>> >>> <https://github.com/carlosypunto/swift-evolution/blob/obtain-let-instead-if-let/proposals/XXXX-Use-obtain-let-instead-if-let-constructions.md> >>> >>> I would like to see what you think and get help with "Effect on ABI >>> stability" and "Effect on API resilience" points >>> >>> Carlos >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> swift-evolution mailing list >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >>> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution> >> >
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
