I picked !! because it seemed to follow somewhat naturally from force-unwrap and nil-coalescing; however, that does depend on how you interpret the syntax of the operator.
I interpreted ?? to figuratively mean “? with a default result instead of nil”, and so derived !! As figuratively meaning “! with default error instead of fatal error”. Regardless, I’m definitely open to alternatives, although can’t think of anything more appropriate offhand. > On 8 Feb 2017, at 20:20, Jean-Daniel <mail...@xenonium.com> wrote: > > While I find the concept interesting, I give a big -1 for using the ‘!’ > operator for something else that fatal error. > >> Le 8 févr. 2017 à 21:00, Jack Newcombe via swift-evolution >> <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> a écrit : >> >> Hi all, >> >> Currently there are a number of different operators for dealing with >> optionals that cover most of the use cases. However, I think I’ve identified >> a missing complement for the existing operators for optionals. >> >> Take the following outcomes for interacting with an optional using existing >> operators (!, ?, ??). The outcomes of using these are as follows: >> >> - value? : >> if value is nil, do nothing and return nil >> if value is not nil, complete the chain by evaluating the rest of the >> expression. Return the result of the expression >> - value! : >> if value is nil, throw.a fatal error. >> If value is not nil, complete the chain by evaluating the rest of the >> expression. Return the result of the expression >> - value ?? default : >> if value is nil, return default >> if value is not nil, return value >> >> It seems to me that, if it is possible to coalesce a nil value with a >> default value, it should also be possible to reject a nil value a non-fatal >> error. >> >> I propose the introduction of a nil-rejection operator (represented here as >> !!) as a complement to the above operators. >> . >> This operator should allow an equivalent behaviour to the forced unwrapping >> of a variable, but with the provision of an error to throw in place of >> throwing a fatal error. >> >> - value !! Error : >> if value is nil, throw non-fatal error >> if value is not nil, return value >> >> Example of how this syntax might work (Where CustomError: Error): >> >> let value = try optionalValue !! CustomError.failure >> >> It is possible to implement this in Swift 3 with the following declaration: >> >> infix operator !! : NilCoalescingPrecedence >> >> func !!<UnwrappedType: Any, ErrorType: Error>(lhs: >> Optional<UnwrappedType>, rhs: ErrorType) throws -> UnwrappedType { >> guard let unwrappedValue = lhs else { >> throw rhs >> } >> return unwrappedValue >> } >> >> I’ve added further examples including composition with the nil-coalescence >> operator here: >> https://gist.github.com/jnewc/304bdd2d330131ddb8a1e615ee560d1d >> <https://gist.github.com/jnewc/304bdd2d330131ddb8a1e615ee560d1d> >> >> This would be particularly convenient in cases where a functions expects >> significant number of optional to contain non-nil values, without the need >> to repeat non-generic guard-let structures with the same else code-block. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Jack >> >> _______________________________________________ >> swift-evolution mailing list >> swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org> >> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
