I agree with this, function signatures in Swift are long enough as it is, fitting them in 80 characters is hard enough already
On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > async is a keyword where as @discardableResult is an attribute. This pitch > does not include any advantages over the current form. In fact this will > rather harm the readbility because you no longer can nicely put the > annotation above the function and it won’t play well with other keywords > like throws, rethrows and async. > > @discardableResult > funx foo() { /* ... */ } > > So -1 for this pitch. > -- > Adrian Zubarev > Sent with Airmail > > Am 9. Oktober 2017 um 18:02:14, Dave DeLong via swift-evolution ( > swift-evolution@swift.org) schrieb: > >> Oooo, I really like this. >> >> It also brings up an interesting point on the whole async discussion. >> Doesn’t the async apply to the *return value* and not the other stuff? >> >> IE instead of: >> >> async func getBool() → Bool >> >> It could be: >> >> func getBool() → async Bool >> >> Dave >> >> On Oct 9, 2017, at 9:58 AM, Fil Ipe via swift-evolution < >> swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: >> >> I find it extremely cumbersome to have to precede a function declaration >> with such an extensive annotation such as @discardableResult >> >> Now that so many functions do need this annotation to be there, our code >> became so ugly. >> >> Besides, having this annotation precede the function declaration kind of >> reminds me of C rather than Swift. Since in C the function declarations >> started by the type of the return value. >> >> I, therefore, think it would be much softer on the eye, and much more >> precise in intent, to instead precede the result of a func with a simpler >> and shorter @discardable annotation >> >> So it would be: >> >> func() -> @discardable Bool { } >> >> Rather than: >> >> @discardableResult func() -> Bool { } >> >> It could be even better if someone could perhaps find a shorter word that >> is a synonym for the word "discardable", that would be as explicit in >> intent as the word "discardable" is in such context, yet be written with >> fewer characters. >> >> Swift regards, >> Filipe Sá. >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > >
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution