> On 18 Jan 2017, at 02:17, Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > A serious possibility would be: `reduce(mutableCopyOf: x) { ... }`. > > It's verbose, but the nicer-looking `reduce(mutating: x) { ... }` is > incorrect since, as Charles pointed out to Dave, it's not `x` that's mutated > but rather a mutable copy of it, so it doesn't matter if `x` itself is > declared with `let` or `var`.
Why not also have that version? var foo = 0 let bar: [SomeType] = ... bar.reduce(mutating: &foo, someFunction) // foo now contains the reduced bar > > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
