> On 1 Jun 2017, at 17:31, Tommaso Piazza via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> On May 28, 2017, at 7:04 PM, John McCall via swift-evolution > >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Yes, I agree. We need to add back tuple destructuring in closure > >>> parameter > >>> lists because this is a serious usability regression. If we're reluctant > >>> to > >>> just "do the right thing" to handle the ambiguity of (a,b), we should at > >>> least > >>> allow it via unambiguous syntax like ((a,b)). I do think that we should > >>> just > >>> "do the right thing", however, with my biggest concern being whether > >>> there's > >>> any reasonable way to achieve that in 4.0.
+1 This seems to be the nub of the solution. It would still be a source compatibility breaking change but only double bracketed syntax can satisfy the anti-ambiguists and the single-line-expressivists and could apply to tuples in general. The current state requiring an intermediate variable is terrible. -John
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
