Oh that's a good point, I hadn't thought of that. It makes sense to keep $abc 
reserved for the debugger. I don't believe LLDB tries to use a bare $ anywhere 
(although I could be wrong) so leaving that as a valid identifier should be 
fine.

-Kevin Ballard

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015, at 07:48 PM, Jordan Rose wrote:
> 
> > On Dec 21, 2015, at 19:47 , Kevin Ballard via swift-evolution 
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >  
> > On another note, I'm tempted to say that we should use $start and $end 
> > instead of $.start and $.end. The compiler doesn't currently allow this, 
> > because it expects a number after the $, but I see no reason why we can't 
> > relax that rule and allow $start to be a valid token. The benefit of this 
> > approach is it frees up $ to be used by third-party code (such as in the 
> > older thread about rebinding `self` for DSLs where I suggested that a 
> > block-based API can use $ as the parameter name so code would say something 
> > like `$.expect(foo).to(.equal(bar))`).
> 
> Without commenting on the rest of this thread, the current rule is that 
> identifiers starting with "$" are reserved for the debugger (not counting 
> implicit closure args). We can change that rule, but the debugger folks won't 
> be happy—the implicit variables you get from the REPL, for example, should 
> stay short. I'm not sure if '$' itself falls under the current rule, though.
> 
> Jordan
> 
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Reply via email to