Oh right. I guess that makes most of my review beside the point then. Sorry.
> Le 11 nov. 2017 à 14:46, BJ Homer <bjho...@gmail.com > <mailto:bjho...@gmail.com>> a écrit : > > > >> On Nov 11, 2017, at 9:49 AM, Michel Fortin via swift-evolution >> <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote: >> >> I think it fits well for arrays. Not sure about optionals. > > This proposal only suggests changing the one on sequences, and even then, not > all of them. Currently, the following exist: > > // Reminder: Int("someString") returns 'Int?' in the following examples > > // (1) Sequence.flatMap() with a closure returning an optional, dropping > anything that maps to nil > ["1", "mountain", "2"].flatMap({ Int($0) }) // [1, 2] > > // (2) Sequence.flatMap() with a closure returning a sequence, then joining > (“flattening”) them into one array > [1, 2, 3].flatMap({ Array(1...$0) }) // [1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 3] > > // (3) Optional.flatMap() with a closure returning an optional, flattening a > nested optional. > ("3" as String?).flatMap({ Int($0) }) // Optional(3) > > > The 2nd and 3rd variants are both about flattening nested structures, and > would not change under this proposal. We would keep calling them “flatMap()”. > There is no a proposal to add Optional.filterMap, nor to change the > Sequence.flatMap variant that flattens nested sequences. The only change > proposed it is to rename the first one. > > -BJ -- Michel Fortin https://michelf.ca <https://michelf.ca/>
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
