> On 3 Oct 2016, at 22:41, 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”.
On the other hand, when I interpolate an optional, I want it to be obvious that
it is an Optional. If I didn’t want Optional(foo) in the string, I would unwrap
it first.
I also disagree with the proposal that the behaviour is surprising. What else
would you expect?
Having said that, I have no objection to the proposed warning.
>
> -Kevin
> _______________________________________________
> 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
