No, no, I get all that. But in practice, these things look and smell the same. Looking at he calling code, you can't tell what's going on. So it has the feel of inconsistency. Especially when a struct can be an AnyObject.
Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 5, 2015, at 19:19, Jens Alfke <j...@mooseyard.com> wrote: > > >> On Oct 5, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Rick Mann <rm...@latencyzero.com> wrote: >> >> Huh. I continue to be bothered by the ambiguity/variability of "let"*. Is >> the reference immutable or the thing it points to? > > A variable (var or let) doesn’t “point to” a struct. It _contains_ the > struct. I.e. it’s a value, not a reference. > > It’s just like in C or C++, really. Given a struct Foo, > const Foo x; // a value: x is immutable; you can’t change its fields > Foo* const x; // a reference: the variable x can’t be changed, but the > Foo it points to can > > The thing Swift doesn’t have that C/C++ do is > const Foo *x; // the Foo can’t be changed through this reference > (though the value of x can) > The reason this was left out is probably that it doesn’t fit at all with > Objective-C and the Cocoa frameworks, which have no concept of a constant > reference to an NSObject. > > —Jens _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
