> On 31 Jan 2017, at 01:59, Joe Groff via swift-evolution
> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
>
> To be honest, I would say that there's no "reason" for this, except as
> lingering effects of our early "functions have simple names, and arguments
> have labeled tuple type" model. If we had originally implemented the language
> with its current (at least aspirational) Smalltalk-ish compound-names model,
> we probably would have ended up allowing this, since the var and func do
> formally have different names. The ability to reference a function by only
> the first segment of its name is likewise legacy of the original model,
> though it happens to be useful since good naming hygiene encourages different
> base names for different things to begin with.
It seams like there is discussion to be had, comparing these models:
[A] functions have simple names, and arguments have labeled tuple type
model
[B] model where we strictly require the labels for referring to n-ary
functions (e.g. "insert(cell:, into:)" instead of "insert")
---
> Example that does not compile:
>
> let randomArray = randomArray(withCapacity: 4096)
I like [B] because it does solve cases of ambiguity, where only using the
base-name of the func causes the "Variable used within its own initial value”
described by Michael.
What are some advantages of [A]? I assume that tuple splatting (i.e. passing a
tuple of args when calling a n-ary function) is one of them, or is that not
related?
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
