Array Initializer with Access to Uninitialized Buffer

[marco.masser]

@nnnnnnnn

@jrose

Can you include some thoughts on why initializedCount is an out-parameter rather than just a return value? I get that naming it makes it slightly easier to talk about in the docs, but if it's a return value the client is required to deal with it. (Unlike the method version, you're not using the return value for anything.)

To be perfectly honest, it's to be parallel with the method that I removed from the proposal, in case we add it in the future. Now that I write that out, it doesn't seem very compelling, esp. given your point about requiring the client to give a value rather than forgetting (although that's a bug would be apparent pretty quickly). I think I'll revert the closure's signature.

@tkremenek announced that this proposal is now scheduled for review. That announcement includes this pull request but that still has the inout initializedCount instead of a return value. Is this a mistake or will this be a point of discussion during review?