No clue as to the origins, but if you insist on using none. you can do:

let a : Int? = .none
let b : Int? = .some(5)

Using the simpler

let a : Int? = nil
let b : Int? = 5

is just sugar. 
Maybe it was foresight to prevent people from saying, if I can do:

let a : Int? = none

Why can't I do:

let b : Int? = some(5)

And then go a step further by asking for all enum to be access without the 
leading dot; scary thought.

So it may be better to stick with '.none' and sugared 'nil'.

Dany

> Le 7 juin 2016 à 20:16, Brandon Knope via swift-evolution 
> <[email protected]> a écrit :
> 
> That's exactly the point I was going for. 
> 
> none makes more sense in this context than nil in my opinion
> 
> Brandon 
> 
>> On Jun 7, 2016, at 8:10 PM, Saagar Jha <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Well, some is the opposite of none in that if I don’t have some, I have 
>> none. nil is just a carry-over from Objective-C.
>> 
>>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 5:07 PM Brandon Knope via swift-evolution 
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I guess for me it comes down to this:
>>> 
>>> Why were some and none chosen for as the cases for Optional?
>>> 
>>> As an extension of that, why does nil then represent none instead of the 
>>> obvious none?
>>> 
>>> There has to be a reason why it's not:
>>> 
>>> enum Optional<T> {
>>> case some(T)
>>> case nil
>>> }
>>> 
>>> None seems a lot more expressive and consistent with Optional. 
>>> 
>>> I am comfortable and use to nil, but with swift being a new language, I 
>>> thought it was worth opening up a discussion about possibly changing 
>>> direction a little here. 
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Brandon 
>>> 
>>>> On Jun 7, 2016, at 7:57 PM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> There are NilLiteralConvertible types other than Optional, but they’re 
>>>> dwindling now that pointer nullability is represented by Optional. That 
>>>> said, I’m not convinced renaming “nil” is worth it at this point. 
>>>> Similarity with other languages is still a good thing.
>>>> 
>>>> It’s true that we might not have picked nil if it hadn’t been for 
>>>> Objective-C, but that doesn’t make it an invalid choice. There are lots of 
>>>> things in Swift we might have done differently if it weren’t for 
>>>> Objective-C and Cocoa.
>>>> 
>>>> Jordan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Jun 5, 2016, at 12:35, Brandon Knope via swift-evolution 
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Quick thought:
>>>>> 
>>>>> If optional has a .none case, wouldn't it be more consistent to rename 
>>>>> nil to none?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Also, would nil make it into Swift if not for other languages?
>>>>> 
>>>>> It also might make it somewhat clearer:
>>>>> 
>>>>> var someInt: Int? = none //looks less like a pointer and more like a 
>>>>> value of nothing 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 1. It is more consistent with the optional enum
>>>>> 2. The intent is arguably clearer
>>>>> 3. nil makes it seem like it's a pointer 
>>>>> 4. Would nil be included if not for prior languages? Would "none" have 
>>>>> been chosen as the keyword if nil wasn't prior art?
>>>>> 
>>>>> One disadvantage is how close it is to .none, but with how common 
>>>>> nil/none is used, some syntactic sugar might make it look nicer than 
>>>>> always having the stray .
>>>>> 
>>>>> On vacation from Orlando, poolside, with a quick thought,
>>>>> Brandon 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> swift-evolution mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> swift-evolution mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>> 
>> -- 
>> -Saagar Jha
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

Reply via email to