On Nov 20, 2017, at 6:31 PM, Tony Allevato <tony.allev...@gmail.com> wrote: > > So (borrowing C++-ish notation), a function of type `(Args...) -> Result` > would become sugar for something like `Function<Args..., Result>`? That > certainly makes sense.
Yep > How would throw-ness be handled—would we need ThrowingFunction and Function, > with the ability to coerce Function -> ThrowingFunction? (Async might pose > similar issues?) Right, there are several ways we could express that which would have to be designed. There are other questions as well: e.g. how do we represent inout? -Chris _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
