> On Dec 15, 2015, at 3:42 PM, Jens Persson via swift-dev <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Ok thanks, and what about the initial topic of this thread, ie stuff like > this: > > func f() { > 1; "two"; 3.0 > [4, 5]; 6 * 7 > print("No warnings or errors!") > } > f() // No warnings or errors! > > Should I file a bug for that too or is this by design / has this been > discussed somewhere already?
There is a discussion on the swift-evolution mailing list about making “@warn_unused_results” semantics the default for all non-void functions. To me, that seems like the cleanest path to address these issues. -Chris > > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Dave Abrahams <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> On Dec 14, 2015, at 11:04 AM, Jens Persson via swift-dev >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Yes, and I don't know if there is any particular reason why the == operator >> for Int doesn't have @warn_unused_result while the one for Doubles has: >> >> func f() { 1 == 2 } // OK >> func g() { 1.0 == 2.0 } // Warning: Result of call '==' is unused > > That’s an oversight; please file a radar! > >> >> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 7:40 PM, Johan Jensen <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> Because currently only unused variable/constant declarations have >> warnings/fix-its attached to them. >> There have been some discussion on making non-void functions warn of unused >> results >> <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mon-20151207/001580.html> >> and it’s possible that this would be in style with that. >> Perhaps (basically) empty statements should also give a warning? >> >> —Johan >> >> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 7:08 PM, Jens Persson via swift-dev >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> func ok() { >> let s = "see"; "Why are there exactly " >> 0 == 0 * 42 >> "warnings and errors in this code" >> let t = s + "?" >> print(t) >> } >> ok() // see? >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> swift-dev mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev >> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> bitCycle AB | Smedjegatan 12 | 742 32 Östhammar | Sweden >> http://www.bitcycle.com/ <http://www.bitcycle.com/> >> Phone: +46-73-753 24 62 >> E-mail: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> swift-dev mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev >> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev> > -Dave > > > > > > > -- > bitCycle AB | Smedjegatan 12 | 742 32 Östhammar | Sweden > http://www.bitcycle.com/ <http://www.bitcycle.com/> > Phone: +46-73-753 24 62 > E-mail: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > _______________________________________________ > swift-dev mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev > <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev>
_______________________________________________ swift-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
