> On Jul 25, 2016, at 3:22 PM, Nate Cook via swift-evolution > <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > >> >> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0132-sequence-end-ops.md > > First, a big thanks to Brent for all the work in categorizing, describing, > and justifying all these changes! I'm largely in favor of the new method > names—several of the renamings lead to better grouping of related methods, > and I think the compromises that have been made make lots of sense. > > However, I'm not in favor of replacing the existing slicing methods with new > subscript syntax that uses partial ranges. These represent a significant new > vernacular for Swift that none of us has used before in the language. I'm > additionally worried about the discoverability and clarity of this kind of > slicing. In the other languages I've used that support similar kinds of > subscripting, it always seems too clever by half—fussy to write and > frequently confusing to read. > > At this late date, I propose keeping the slicing methods (i.e., > prefix(upTo:), prefix(through:), and suffix(from:)) and considering adopting > the new slicing-via-subscript syntax in a future proposal.
This seems like a reasonable alternative. The slicing / subscript syntax can reasonably be viewed as sugar for the named methods. > > Best, > Nate > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
