(I know isTrue is redundant. I only considered it for symmetry.) > On Jan 13, 2018, at 11:09 AM, C. Keith Ray <keith...@mac.com> wrote: > > If you would like something better than "== false" I suggest adding computed > properties 'isTrue' and 'isFalse' to Boolean. > > >> On Jan 13, 2018, at 11:06 AM, Karl Wagner via swift-evolution >> <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On 12. Jan 2018, at 20:54, Alejandro Martinez via swift-evolution >>> <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote: >>> >>> I wouldn't go as far as to ask to fade out ! but in all my code I end >>> up doing == false just for readability. That ! knows who to hide >>> himself too well :P >>> >> >> Yeah so do I. ! is a very narrow character and totally changes the meaning >> of the logic. >> >> That said, I can’t come up with a clearer name than “== false”. inverted() >> isn’t helpful. toggle() on a mutable Bool is good, though. >> >> - Karl >> >>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 10:13 AM, Adrian Zubarev via swift-evolution >>> <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote: >>>> I’m not sure if this would be considered or not, but I would like if the >>>> negation operator `!` would fade out. >>>> >>>> If this is ever going to a review then I’d suggest that we add a pair of >>>> functions, one mutating and the other non-mutating. >>>> >>>> extension Bool { >>>> mutating func invert() { >>>> self = !self >>>> } >>>> >>>> func inverted() { >>>> return !self >>>> } >>>> } >>>> >>>> I’d rather use `inverted` instead of `!` because of the readability this >>>> function provides. >>>> >>>> if !items.contains(item) { ... } >>>> >>>> if items.contains(item).inverted() { ... } >>>> >>>> —— >>>> >>>> I personally have some other extensions like: >>>> >>>> extension Bool { >>>> @discardableResult >>>> func whenTrue<T>(execute closure: () throws -> T) rethrows -> T? { >>>> if self { return try closure() } >>>> return nil >>>> } >>>> >>>> @discardableResult >>>> func whenFalse<T>(execute closure: () throws -> T) rethrows -> T? { >>>> if !self { return try closure() } >>>> return nil >>>> } >>>> } >>>> >>>> But this is more a personal preference. >>>> >>>> —— >>>> >>>> That said, if the community is fine with the `invert/inverted` pair then >>>> I’d >>>> say go for it ;) >>>> >>>> Am 12. Januar 2018 um 09:14:22, Nate Cook via swift-evolution >>>> (swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>) schrieb: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 12:15 AM, Chris Eidhof via swift-evolution >>>> <swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hey SE! >>>> >>>> When we have a bunch of nested structs: >>>> >>>> struct Sample { >>>> var bar: Bar >>>> } >>>> >>>> struct Bar { >>>> var show: Bool >>>> } >>>> >>>> var foo = Sample(bar: Bar(show: false)) >>>> >>>> It can be repetitive to toggle a deeply nested boolean: >>>> >>>> foo.bar.show = !foo.bar.show // duplication >>>> >>>> I sometimes add a `toggle` extension on `Bool` >>>> >>>> extension Bool { >>>> mutating func toggle() { >>>> self = !self >>>> } >>>> } >>>> >>>> This allows you to write the same code without duplication, and makes the >>>> intent clearer: >>>> >>>> foo.bar.show.toggle() >>>> >>>> >>>> I like it! >>>> >>>> In other languages, I don't think the `toggle` would make as much sense, >>>> but >>>> the mutable self makes this very useful. >>>> >>>> After I posted it on Twitter, it turns out I'm not the only one: >>>> https://twitter.com/PublicExtension/status/730434956376346624 >>>> <https://twitter.com/PublicExtension/status/730434956376346624> >>>> >>>> I would have gone straight to a proposal, but I think we can do some >>>> bikeshedding about the name of `toggle`? >>>> >>>> >>>> Another verb that could work is `invert`. >>>> >>>> The `!` operator that does this is the negation operator, but I think >>>> `negate` could sound to some like "make this false" rather than toggling. >>>> >>>> Nate >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Alejandro Martinez >>> http://alejandromp.com <http://alejandromp.com/> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> swift-evolution mailing list >>> swift-evolution@swift.org >>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >> >> _______________________________________________ >> swift-evolution mailing list >> swift-evolution@swift.org <mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org> >> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
