I did: 18771081
> On Oct 27, 2014, at 11:37 , Greg Parker wrote:
>
>
>> On Oct 24, 2014, at 8:31 PM, Rick Mann wrote:
>>
>> Anyway, once I realized what was going on, I was able to get the behavior I
>> wanted. It's not perfect, because now I have to declare my function types
>> like this t
> On Oct 24, 2014, at 8:31 PM, Rick Mann wrote:
>
> Anyway, once I realized what was going on, I was able to get the behavior I
> wanted. It's not perfect, because now I have to declare my function types
> like this to get some documentation in them. I want to document at the
> function decla
> On Oct 24, 2014, at 19:55 , Quincey Morris
> wrote:
>
> On Oct 24, 2014, at 18:38 , Rick Mann wrote:
>>
>> Oh! I think I figured out what I'm doing wrong. The typealias doesn't
>> understand local names, and that makes some sense. I can just get rid of
>> those altogether and be find.
>
On Oct 24, 2014, at 18:38 , Rick Mann wrote:
>
> Oh! I think I figured out what I'm doing wrong. The typealias doesn't
> understand local names, and that makes some sense. I can just get rid of
> those altogether and be find.
I don’t understand what you’re saying here. What are “local names”,
Oh! I think I figured out what I'm doing wrong. The typealias doesn't
understand local names, and that makes some sense. I can just get rid of those
altogether and be find. Sorry for the noise.
One of the things I dislike the most about Swift is its insistence on "being
expressi
One of the things I dislike the most about Swift is its insistence on "being
expressive". The docs talk about "allowing" expressivity, but should you choose
to allow it, you then require it, and Swift implicitly requires it in a lot of
places.
Here's an example in a playground, where the call t
