> On Nov 12, 2017, at 8:11 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution 
> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Nov 12, 2017, at 12:55 AM, David Hart via swift-evolution 
>> <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello evolution folks,
>> 
>> After the positive feedback on the idea of improving capturing semantics of 
>> local functions, Alex Lynch and I worked on a proposal. Please let us know 
>> if you have any feedback:
>> 
>> https://github.com/hartbit/swift-evolution/blob/improving-capturing-semantics-of-local-functions/proposals/XXXX-improve-capture-semantics-of-local-functions.md
> 
> So, quoting the proposal:
> 
>> First of all, this proposal suggests extending the requirement of the self. 
>> prefix to local functions, but only if the local function is used as or used 
>> inside an escaping closure.
> 
> I don't love that the use of a function many lines away can cause errors in 
> that closure. There's a "spooky action-at-a-distance" quality to this 
> behavior that I don't like.

Agreed.

> I think this is a good idea, but I don't like bringing the already weird use 
> of `in` to actual functions.
> 
> By analogy with the current closure syntax, the capture list ought to go 
> somewhere before the parameter list, in one of these slots:
> 
> 1.    func fn<T>[foo, bar](param: T) throws -> T where T: Equatable { … }
> 2.    func fn[foo, bar]<T>(param: T) throws -> T where T: Equatable { … }
> 3.    func [foo, bar] fn<T>(param: T) throws -> T where T: Equatable { … }
> 4.    [foo, bar] func fn<T>(param: T) throws -> T where T: Equatable { … }
> 
> Of these options, I actually think #4 reads best; 1 and 2 are very cluttered, 
> and 3 just seems weird. But it seems like the one that would be easiest to 
> misparse.

Another option that reads nicely IMHO is

func fn<T>(param: T) throws -> T where T : Equatable [foo, bar] { … }

I think #4 is ambiguous with array literals unfortunately.

Perhaps this proposal should be split in two — the ‘self.’/escaping part is 
source breaking, and will likely require more discussion. Adding capture lists 
to local functions seems like a more straightforward change.

Slava

> 
> -- 
> Brent Royal-Gordon
> Architechies
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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