Once again, the counter-argument is the the same. Before there was Swift, this is exactly what we would do, and it was never a surprise.
I would say the semantics of wrapped API should be taken from the viewpoint of the target language (ObjC), and not from the viewpoint of Swift. -Kenny > On May 16, 2017, at 3:04 PM, David Waite via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On May 15, 2017, at 8:24 AM, T.J. Usiyan via swift-evolution >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> The argument is not about whether or not it should come through as an >> object. The argument is about the fact that *sometimes* it would come >> through as an object and other times it would not. Optionality isn't an >> obvious way to make that decision. >> > > A second argument is that NSNumber does not represent an integer - only that > it can be *initialized* by an integer. So the semantics of Int? -> NSNumber > as an outbound result are completely different than the semantics of NSNumber > -> Int? as an inbound parameter. > > -DW > > _______________________________________________ > 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
