More progress! This sounds good, but it looks like what you intend is for r to be the error message in the Result enum type.
enum Result { case .Fail(String) // Error message case .Succeed(MyType) // Something to work with } guard case let .Succeed(m) = returnsResult() else case let .Failure(r) { return r // Looks like r is bound to the error String. // But maybe you meant r = the entire returnsResult() result. } The sort of message-passing error-handling I have in mind is where each method in the call chain returns a full Result enum and each stage checks it for Succeed/Fail, and immediately bails on Fail, returning (propagating) the Result. To be sure, this is sort of what exceptions do under the hood anyway. My use-case is a recursive descent parser that I want to bail when a syntax error is found. This could happen way deep in the stack of calls. If I consistently return a .Fail(ErrorCode) or .Succeed(ASTNode) from each method, I just pass on the Result in case of .Fail, or use it in case of .Succeed. > On 23 Dec, 2015, at 15:35, Joe Groff <jgr...@apple.com> wrote: > > >> On Dec 23, 2015, at 10:16 AM, Andrew Duncan via swift-evolution >> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: >> > > A slight generalization would be to allow for an arbitrary pattern in the > `else` clause: > > guard case let .Succeed(m) = returnsResult() else case let .Failure(r) { > return r > } > > with the requirement that the "guard" and "else" patterns form an exhaustive > match when taken together. That feels nicer than special-case knowledge of > two-case enums, though I admit it punishes what's likely to be a common case. > > -Joe _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution