> On Nov 21, 2016, at 13:14 , Nevin Brackett-Rozinsky
> <nevin.brackettrozin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I don’t see what there is to be confused about.
>
> A “literal” is literally a bunch of characters in source code. The compiler
> interprets those characters as representing whatever type is appropriate to
> the context.
>
> For the case at hand, a boolean literal can be interpreted as any type which
> conforms to the ExpressibleByBooleanLiteral protocol. If the context provides
> no information, the compiler defaults to interpreting a boolean literal as
> representing a Bool.
>
> The situation is similar for every other kind of literal. For example, “2”
> defaults to being interpreted as an Int, but if the context requires a Double
> then it will be interpreted as a Double. The text “2” does not have a type of
> its own.
Except it does, because if I write
let a = 2
a is of type Int (at least, according to Xcode's code completion). But this
gives inconsistent results:
let t = true
let a = Int(true)
let b = Int(t) // Error
I find this to be very inconsistent and confusing.
>
> Nevin
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Rick Mann via swift-users
> <swift-users@swift.org> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 21, 2016, at 09:46 , Kenny Leung via swift-users
> > <swift-users@swift.org> wrote:
> >
> > This is so confusing. "Literals are untyped", but there’s a
> > “BooleanLiteral”, which is obviously of type Boolean.
>
> Agreed.
>
> --
> Rick Mann
> rm...@latencyzero.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-users mailing list
> swift-users@swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
>
--
Rick Mann
rm...@latencyzero.com
_______________________________________________
swift-users mailing list
swift-users@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
