> On 3 Apr 2016, at 17:20, Haravikk via swift-evolution
> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
>
> Although I use trailing closures a lot less now, I think I’m a +1 anyway for
> consistency’s sake.
>
> I actually really like the idea of having trailing keywords in loops and if
> statements, these needn’t be required (except where a trailing closure is
> used) but for example it means I could do a fully natural language loop like:
>
> for eachValue in theValues do { … }
This is actually kind of bizarre. Here we are trying to invent new syntax so
that the trailing closure can be used in if/while conditions and for sequences.
However, there is already a perfectly good syntax for putting closures in these
positions: put the closure in the parentheses of the function call. Are people
really so desperate to use trailing closures everywhere that we have to add new
keywords to the language? I don’t think they are.
>
> I like the consistency of every block having a kind of type (do, else, defer,
> catch etc.).
That is a rabbit hole down which you probably shouldn't go. If we go down the
route of blocks having a “type”, the current situation in Swift becomes
somewhat inconsistent. I would argue that the `else` block on a `guard` is of a
different type to the `else` block on an `if`. If anything, the `else` block of
an `if` is closer to the `then` block. Also, would you allow the `do` block in
a `for` or `while` to have a `catch` block following it? If not, then these
blocks are different to the existing bare `do` block.
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
