> On 16 Jan 2017, at 14:49, Chris Eidhof via swift-evolution
> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> How does everyone feel about adding a second version of `reduce` to
> `Sequence`? Instead of a `combine` function that's of type `(A, Element) ->
> A`, it would be `(inout A, Element) -> ()`. This way, we can write nice
> functionals algorithms, but have the benefits of inout (mutation within the
> function, and hopefully some copy eliminations).
>
> IIRC, Loïc Lecrenier first asked this on Twitter. I've been using it ever
> since, because it can really improve readability (the possible performance
> gain is nice, too).
>
> Here's `reduce` with an `inout` parameter, including a sample:
> https://gist.github.com/chriseidhof/fd3e9aa621569752d1b04230f92969d7
> <https://gist.github.com/chriseidhof/fd3e9aa621569752d1b04230f92969d7>
>
> --
> Chris Eidhof
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution@swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
+1
I would even argue for it to be the default.
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
