> On Oct 3, 2016, at 14:41, Kevin Ballard via swift-evolution
> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016, at 10:52 AM, Harlan Haskins via swift-evolution wrote:
>> Swift developers frequently use string interpolation as a convenient,
>> concise syntax for interweaving variable values with strings. The
>> interpolation machinery, however, has surprising behavior in one specific
>> case: Optional<T>. If a user puts an optional value into a string
>> interpolation segment, it will insert either "Optional("value")" or "nil" in
>> the resulting string. Neither of these is particularly desirable, so we
>> propose a warning and fix-it to surface solutions to these potential
>> mistakes.
>>
>
> Is there any way we could instead allow Optionals but just print them the way
> we print ImplicitlyUnwrappedOptionals? That's almost always how I want my
> Optionals to work when interpolating. To be specific, this means for .some(x)
> we just print x, and for .none we print "nil".
We had this at one point, but we took it out because people would forget to
test the nil case. I think `?? ""` or `?? nil` really is the best answer here.
Jordan
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
