> On 7 Oct 2017, at 19:22, Tony Allevato via swift-evolution 
> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
> 
> I think the important thing to consider is, what advantage would such a 
> feature provide *other* than to reduce keystrokes? (I don't personally think 
> that optimizing for keys pressed by itself should be a goal.)
> 
> In the case of closures, single expression closures without "return" improve 
> readability because such closures are often chained for functional 
> programming patterns:
> 
>     someArray.filter { $0.isFloopy }.map { $0.grobber }
> 
> Having "return" there would be noise that detracts from understanding what's 
> going on in that algorithm. It's also worth noting that in this context, the 
> closure *itself* is also an expression.
> 
> In functions, property getters, and subscripts, the same constraints don't 
> really hold. They're declarations, not expressions, so they don't chain 
> together and they're not subject to the same readability problems as closure 
> expressions.

Agreed. I would be wary because consistency would push us to allow it in 
functions also and I’m not sure it makes as much sense there.

>> On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 9:59 AM Nevin Brackett-Rozinsky via swift-evolution 
>> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Xiaodi Wu <xiaodi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This has been brought up on the list before. For instance:
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/pull/608
>>> 
>>> Chris Lattner’s response at that time was:
>>> 
>>> ‘Just MHO, but I consider this syntactic sugar, not a fundamental feature 
>>> that fits the goal of Swift 4 stage 2. 
>>> 
>>> ‘I’m also pretty opposed to doing it at any time. The rationale of 
>>> “implicit return” in closures is specifically because they are limited to a 
>>> single expression, which makes the semantics “obvious”. This was carefully 
>>> considered.’
>> 
>> This objection is not applicable, because we are discussing the possibility 
>> to omit “return” exactly when there is a single expression in the getter.
>> 
>> Nevin
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Reply via email to