I stand corrected. I do/did think that there is a difference in the way it handles pointers optionals and other optionals, but I now realise that even that could not be the case. So please ignore the last line in my previous post.
The rest still stand ;-) Regards, Rien Site: http://balancingrock.nl Blog: http://swiftrien.blogspot.com Github: http://github.com/Swiftrien Project: http://swiftfire.nl > On 10 Jan 2017, at 18:14, Joe Groff <jgr...@apple.com> wrote: > > >> On Jan 9, 2017, at 11:19 PM, Rien via swift-users <swift-users@swift.org> >> wrote: >> >> It means that a call to that function with an optional will unwrap the >> optional before it is used. >> >> That is quite neat when dealing with C-API’s because often you will receive >> a pointer from a C-function which is optional to account for the fact that >> it can be NULL (= nil). >> By using a forced unwrapped input parameter you are saved the trouble of >> unwrapping all these pointers when using them as input for other C-APIs. >> >> In short, it makes it easier to interface with C-API’s. >> >> Note that there is some under-the-hood magic going on because a C-pointer is >> an unboxed value, while a ‘normal’ optional is a boxed value. > > Optionals are never boxed. > > -Joe _______________________________________________ swift-users mailing list swift-users@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
