Re: [swift-evolution] [swift-evolution-announce] [Review] SE-0053 Remove explicit use of let from Function Parameters

[Patrick Gili via swift-evolution]

> 
> 
>   * What is your evaluation of the proposal?

Given var has been removed and inout has been moved, forcing developers to 
specify let seems redundant, and hence I support the proposal.

>   * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change 
> to Swift?

Redundancy is as bad as inconsistency. Hence, the problem is significant enough 
to warrant a change.

>   * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?

Yes.

>   * If you have you used other languages or libraries with a similar 
> feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?

Not really.

>   * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick 
> reading, or an in-depth study?

Quick read.


___
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Re: [swift-evolution] [swift-evolution-announce] [Review] SE-0053 Remove explicit use of let from Function Parameters

[Colin Barrett via swift-evolution]

Okay, great. That makes sense, thanks for clarifying Chris. 

-Colin (via thumbs)

> On Mar 25, 2016, at 12:35 AM, Chris Lattner  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Mar 24, 2016, at 11:09 AM, Colin Barrett via swift-evolution 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> The proposal is unclear to me in what it is, er, proposing. The motivation 
>> section speaks about allow `let` to be used as argument label, but the 
>> proposed solution says that func foo(let x: Int) { … } would be an error. 
>> That seems like it’s contrary to the motivations of the proposal.
> 
> The proposal is simply that "func foo(let x: Int) { … }” be disallowed, since 
> it is redundant with "func foo(x: Int) { … }”.  In terms of taking back “let” 
> as a parameter label, this only makes sense in the future, when we give up on 
> migration of the former into the later.
> 
> At that point, let could conceivably be used as an external label, as in 
> "foo(let: 42)”.  This would make the language simpler and more consistent, 
> since we allow other keywords there.
> 
> -Chris
> 
>> 
>> -Colin
>> 
>>> On Mar 24, 2016, at 2:00 PM, Chris Lattner  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello Swift community,
>>> 
>>> The review of "Remove explicit use of let from Function Parameters" begins 
>>> now and runs through March 27th. The proposal is available here:
>>> 
>>>
>>> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0053-remove-let-from-function-parameters.md
>>> 
>>> Reviews are an important part of the Swift evolution process. All reviews 
>>> should be sent to the swift-evolution mailing list at:
>>>https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>>> or, if you would like to keep your feedback private, directly to the review 
>>> manager.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> What goes into a review?
>>> 
>>> The goal of the review process is to improve the proposal under review 
>>> through constructive criticism and, eventually, determine the direction of 
>>> Swift. When writing your review, here are some questions you might want to 
>>> answer in your review:
>>> 
>>>* What is your evaluation of the proposal?
>>>* Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change 
>>> to Swift?
>>>* Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?
>>>* If you have you used other languages or libraries with a similar 
>>> feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?
>>>* How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick 
>>> reading, or an in-depth study?
>>> 
>>> More information about the Swift evolution process is available at
>>> 
>>>https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md
>>> 
>>> Thank you,
>>> 
>>> -Chris Lattner
>>> Review Manager
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> swift-evolution-announce mailing list
>>> swift-evolution-annou...@swift.org
>>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution-announce
>> 
>> ___
>> swift-evolution mailing list
>> swift-evolution@swift.org
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
> 
___
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Re: [swift-evolution] [swift-evolution-announce] [Review] SE-0053 Remove explicit use of let from Function Parameters

[Chris Lattner via swift-evolution]

> On Mar 24, 2016, at 11:09 AM, Colin Barrett via swift-evolution 
>  wrote:
> 
> The proposal is unclear to me in what it is, er, proposing. The motivation 
> section speaks about allow `let` to be used as argument label, but the 
> proposed solution says that func foo(let x: Int) { … } would be an error. 
> That seems like it’s contrary to the motivations of the proposal.

The proposal is simply that "func foo(let x: Int) { … }” be disallowed, since 
it is redundant with "func foo(x: Int) { … }”.  In terms of taking back “let” 
as a parameter label, this only makes sense in the future, when we give up on 
migration of the former into the later.

At that point, let could conceivably be used as an external label, as in 
"foo(let: 42)”.  This would make the language simpler and more consistent, 
since we allow other keywords there.

-Chris

> 
> -Colin
> 
>> On Mar 24, 2016, at 2:00 PM, Chris Lattner  wrote:
>> 
>> Hello Swift community,
>> 
>> The review of "Remove explicit use of let from Function Parameters" begins 
>> now and runs through March 27th. The proposal is available here:
>> 
>>  
>> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0053-remove-let-from-function-parameters.md
>> 
>> Reviews are an important part of the Swift evolution process. All reviews 
>> should be sent to the swift-evolution mailing list at:
>>  https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>> or, if you would like to keep your feedback private, directly to the review 
>> manager.
>> 
>> 
>> What goes into a review?
>> 
>> The goal of the review process is to improve the proposal under review 
>> through constructive criticism and, eventually, determine the direction of 
>> Swift. When writing your review, here are some questions you might want to 
>> answer in your review:
>> 
>>  * What is your evaluation of the proposal?
>>  * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change 
>> to Swift?
>>  * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?
>>  * If you have you used other languages or libraries with a similar 
>> feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?
>>  * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick 
>> reading, or an in-depth study?
>> 
>> More information about the Swift evolution process is available at
>> 
>>  https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md
>> 
>> Thank you,
>> 
>> -Chris Lattner
>> Review Manager
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> swift-evolution-announce mailing list
>> swift-evolution-annou...@swift.org
>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution-announce
> 
> ___
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution@swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

___
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Re: [swift-evolution] [swift-evolution-announce] [Review] SE-0053 Remove explicit use of let from Function Parameters

[Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution]

>   * What is your evaluation of the proposal?

I'm in favor of the change, but not the proposal or review.

This seems like a mere omission from SE-0003 "Removing var from Function 
Parameters" 
.
 I don't think it's a good idea to set a precedent that even facepalmingly 
obvious mistakes in proposals can only be fixed with a full review cycle.

Rather, I think this proposal should be rejected and, after a simple, informal 
discussion on the list, SE-0003 should be amended to eliminate the `let` 
keyword. There is precedent for rejecting a proposal because the proposal 
shouldn't have been necessary: SE-0013 "Remove Partial Application of Non-Final 
Super Methods" 

 was rejected because the core team decided the evolution process wasn't right 
for that particular change.

I believe the core team should do that again here, rather than turning the 
evolution process into a straightjacket preventing it from making simple, 
straightforward, and obviously correct changes which have already passed review 
in spirit, if not in letter.

-- 
Brent Royal-Gordon
Architechies

___
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Re: [swift-evolution] [swift-evolution-announce] [Review] SE-0053 Remove explicit use of let from Function Parameters

[Joseph Lord via swift-evolution]

> On Mar 24, 2016, at 6:00 PM, Chris Lattner  wrote:
> 
> The review of "Remove explicit use of let from Function Parameters" begins 
> now and runs through March 27th. The proposal is available here:
> 
>
> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0053-remove-let-from-function-parameters.md

+1 seems obvious to me. I suspect the syntax is rarely used anyway.

Joseph
___
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Re: [swift-evolution] [swift-evolution-announce] [Review] SE-0053 Remove explicit use of let from Function Parameters

[Colin Barrett via swift-evolution]

The proposal is unclear to me in what it is, er, proposing. The motivation 
section speaks about allow `let` to be used as argument label, but the proposed 
solution says that func foo(let x: Int) { … } would be an error. That seems 
like it’s contrary to the motivations of the proposal.

-Colin

> On Mar 24, 2016, at 2:00 PM, Chris Lattner  wrote:
> 
> Hello Swift community,
> 
> The review of "Remove explicit use of let from Function Parameters" begins 
> now and runs through March 27th. The proposal is available here:
> 
>   
> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0053-remove-let-from-function-parameters.md
> 
> Reviews are an important part of the Swift evolution process. All reviews 
> should be sent to the swift-evolution mailing list at:
>   https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
> or, if you would like to keep your feedback private, directly to the review 
> manager.
> 
> 
> What goes into a review?
> 
> The goal of the review process is to improve the proposal under review 
> through constructive criticism and, eventually, determine the direction of 
> Swift. When writing your review, here are some questions you might want to 
> answer in your review:
> 
>   * What is your evaluation of the proposal?
>   * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a change 
> to Swift?
>   * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?
>   * If you have you used other languages or libraries with a similar 
> feature, how do you feel that this proposal compares to those?
>   * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick 
> reading, or an in-depth study?
> 
> More information about the Swift evolution process is available at
> 
>   https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> -Chris Lattner
> Review Manager
> 
> 
> ___
> swift-evolution-announce mailing list
> swift-evolution-annou...@swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution-announce

___
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution