> I thought about this, but { $0 } is already a fairly compact way to express
> the identity function.
It is, but I worry a bit about the core team's tendency to say "Oh, just use a
closure" whenever something like this comes up. A function/method/property name
can be merely *read*; a closure must be *interpreted*. And writing closures is
error-prone—a slip of the keys and you've written `{ 0 }` or `{ 40 }` instead
of `{ $0 }`, which look similar and (soon will) work in the same expressions
but behave completely differently.
Naming operations is powerful; it helps you understand them better and it helps
you avoid fat-fingering them.
--
Brent Royal-Gordon
Architechies
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
