3 ms·
You're surprised a relatively easy to implement, one off feature with no dependencies and no impact on the rest of the language can be done before a feature tha
by jshier 7y ago
You're surprised a relatively easy to implement, one off feature with no dependencies and no impact on the rest of the language can be done before a feature that impacts huge areas of the language and requires underlying runtime and compiler support?
- zionic 7y agoIt's easy enough to say things like "well if you don't like it don't use it". Meanwhile as a primarily swift dev I can't stop others (outside of my team) from using this disastrous syntax. The first time I have to dig into someone's backwards codebase that uses I'm gonna flip. Objects defining named functions allows you to reason about them logically. Car.tireSizeInches() returns an Int type. Any other developer can see that and know whats up, or type "Car." and explore relevant functionality. What the crap does Car() do? Etc. This is a huge backwards step for swift syntax. I hope most of the large open source libs ban it. As for implementation difficulty, see my sibling reply.