- Proposal: SE-0053
- Author: Nicholas Maccharoli
- Status: Accepted for Swift 3
- Review manager: Chris Lattner
Since function parameters are immutable by default, allowing function parameters to be explicitly labeled
as let
is a bit of a syntactic redundancy that would best be removed.
Not allowing function parameters to be explicitly declared as let
would permit a more simple and uniform function declaration syntax for swift.
Furthermore proposal SE-0003: "Removing var
from Function Parameters" removes var
from function parameters removing any possible ambiguity as to whether a function parameter is immutable or not.
Swift-evolution thread: [swift-evolution] Removing explicit use of let
from Function Parameters
Now that proposal SE-0003: "Removing var
from Function Parameters" has been accepted, it would make sense that the syntax for function parameters being explicitly declared as let
would be removed as well.
Since prepending let
to an argument label does not modify behavior, leaving it as part of the language would only add redundancy and complexity to Swift's syntax at no added benefit.
Furthermore SE-0001 allowed the use of all keywords as argument labels except for inout
, var
and let
.
Proposal SE-0031 made inout
a type modifier freeing inout
to be used as an argument label and proposal SE-0003 prohibits declaring function parameters as var
freeing var
to be used as an argument label.
The only keyword still in use that is preventing any keyword from being used as an argument label is let
which if removed from function parameter syntax would permit SE-0001 to allow all keywords as argument labels with no exceptions.
Make functions with parameters declared with an explicit let
prohibited and a compile time error.
Basically make functions declared like this a compile time error:
func foo(let x: Int) { ... }
In favor of omitting let
like this:
func foo(x: Int) { ... }
In code that is migrating to this newer proposed syntax the let
keyword should be deleted if placed before a function parameter or else it will be treated as an external label.
This should not be too disruptive since the common convention is already to not label function parameters as let
.
Leave the redundant syntax in place, but I personally don't see any merit in that.