> On Jan 1, 2016, at 2:21 PM, Ethan Diamond <edgewood7...@gmail.com> wrote: > > FWIW I don't think the backlash to the use of ^ with Obj-C blocks was because > of the carat itself,
Fair enough, different people have different objections. I’m sure some people love blocks syntax :-) > but because of the inconsistency of the syntax in different contexts. > Sometimes the return type was after the ^, sometimes before. Sometimes you > had to use (^). Sometimes the carat had the name of the block with it > ^functionName. None of it fit in with the [object methodName] syntax of the > language itself. No, it fit perfectly with C. Blocks are an extension to C, not technically an Objective-C extension. > Anyway, if closure syntax is unofficially set in stone then that's that. I > still appreciate you taking the time to listen. I understand the other points you make, but again, we’re pretty happy with closure syntax as is. Keeping the arguments inside the closure has a ton of advantages for the expression grammar (making it possible to parse :-) and allows trailing closures to emulate builtin statements. -Chris _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
