> On Mar 20, 2016, at 1:26 PM, Tyler Fleming Cloutier via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Also as a brief aside, it’s not super intuitive to me that the syntax for the > catch pattern matching wildcard is > > catch _ > > whereas it is > > default > > for switches. I think I saw Chris mention somewhere that default was chosen > because of it’s wide familiarity. Does anyone recall the reason?
Yes, both `switch` and `default` were chosen because that's what other C-style languages use. Note that `case _` is the same as `default` in `switch`, so you can use `case _` and `catch _` if you don't care about C-style appearance. I don't think anyone has proposed allowing `default` in place of `catch _`. There was an earlier discussion of removing `default` from `switch` and requiring `case _` instead (thread "Remove default case in switch-case" on swift-evolution). -- Greg Parker [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> Runtime Wrangler
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
