Compact iteration of optional collection?

JetForMe · July 28, 2016, 9:55pm

I often call methods that return an optional collection. I then iterate over it. The problem is, it's a bit cumbersome to write:

     if let container = someOptionalContainer
    {
        for item in container
        {
        }
    }

I wish I could just write

    for item in someOptionalContainer
    {
    }

such that if the optional is nil, it just skips the iteration altogether.

Is there a syntax for that (especially in Swift 3)?

···

--
Rick Mann
rmann@latencyzero.com

jtbandes · July 28, 2016, 9:56pm

How about "for item in someOptionalContainer ?? " ?

···

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Rick Mann via swift-users < swift-users@swift.org> wrote:

I often call methods that return an optional collection. I then iterate
over it. The problem is, it's a bit cumbersome to write:

     if let container = someOptionalContainer
    {
        for item in container
        {
        }
    }

I wish I could just write

    for item in someOptionalContainer
    {
    }

such that if the optional is nil, it just skips the iteration altogether.

Is there a syntax for that (especially in Swift 3)?

--
Rick Mann
rmann@latencyzero.com

_______________________________________________
swift-users mailing list
swift-users@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users

eskimo · July 29, 2016, 7:53am

Why do these methods return an optional collection rather an empty collection? Back in the day Cocoa code used to work that way because constructing empty collections was expensive. These days I avoid optionality unless that optionality is signalling something relevant. So I never write code like this:

    if let container = someOptionalContainer {
        for item in container {
            [do stuff with item]
        }
    }

it’s always this:

    for item in container {
        [do stuff with item]
    }

or this:

    if let container = someOptionalContainer {
        for item in container {
            [do stuff with item]
        }
    } else {
        [do other stuff]
    }

Share and Enjoy

···

On 28 Jul 2016, at 22:55, Rick Mann via swift-users <swift-users@swift.org> wrote:

I often call methods that return an optional collection.

--
Quinn "The Eskimo!" <http://www.apple.com/developer/>
Apple Developer Relations, Developer Technical Support, Core OS/Hardware

JetForMe · July 28, 2016, 9:58pm

Yeah, I suppose that works. Feels a bit clunky, like the language lacks specific support for this (in that it provides specific support for so many other common constructs). But I guess I can make do with that.

I suppose there's a bit of a performance hit, in that constructing an empty array and iterating over it is more expensive than a simple nil check, but that's unlikely to cause issues in practice.

Thanks.

···

On Jul 28, 2016, at 14:56 , Jacob Bandes-Storch <jtbandes@gmail.com> wrote:

How about "for item in someOptionalContainer ?? " ?

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Rick Mann via swift-users <swift-users@swift.org> wrote:
I often call methods that return an optional collection. I then iterate over it. The problem is, it's a bit cumbersome to write:

     if let container = someOptionalContainer
    {
        for item in container
        {
        }
    }

I wish I could just write

    for item in someOptionalContainer
    {
    }

such that if the optional is nil, it just skips the iteration altogether.

Is there a syntax for that (especially in Swift 3)?

--
Rick Mann
rmann@latencyzero.com

_______________________________________________
swift-users mailing list
swift-users@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users

--
Rick Mann
rmann@latencyzero.com

jtbandes · July 28, 2016, 9:59pm

You should test it out — I'd guess there's a good chance it gets optimized
out.

···

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:58 PM Rick Mann <rmann@latencyzero.com> wrote:

Yeah, I suppose that works. Feels a bit clunky, like the language lacks
specific support for this (in that it provides specific support for so many
other common constructs). But I guess I can make do with that.

I suppose there's a bit of a performance hit, in that constructing an
empty array and iterating over it is more expensive than a simple nil
check, but that's unlikely to cause issues in practice.

Thanks.

> On Jul 28, 2016, at 14:56 , Jacob Bandes-Storch <jtbandes@gmail.com> > wrote:
>
> How about "for item in someOptionalContainer ?? " ?
>
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Rick Mann via swift-users < > swift-users@swift.org> wrote:
> I often call methods that return an optional collection. I then iterate
over it. The problem is, it's a bit cumbersome to write:
>
> if let container = someOptionalContainer
> {
> for item in container
> {
> }
> }
>
> I wish I could just write
>
> for item in someOptionalContainer
> {
> }
>
> such that if the optional is nil, it just skips the iteration altogether.
>
> Is there a syntax for that (especially in Swift 3)?
>
>
> --
> Rick Mann
> rmann@latencyzero.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-users mailing list
> swift-users@swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
>

--
Rick Mann
rmann@latencyzero.com

saagarjha · July 28, 2016, 10:14pm

The nil check and creating an empty array have very similar performance, in my naïve testing.

Saagar Jha

···

On Jul 28, 2016, at 14:59, Jacob Bandes-Storch via swift-users <swift-users@swift.org> wrote:

You should test it out — I'd guess there's a good chance it gets optimized out.
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:58 PM Rick Mann <rmann@latencyzero.com <mailto:rmann@latencyzero.com>> wrote:
Yeah, I suppose that works. Feels a bit clunky, like the language lacks specific support for this (in that it provides specific support for so many other common constructs). But I guess I can make do with that.

I suppose there's a bit of a performance hit, in that constructing an empty array and iterating over it is more expensive than a simple nil check, but that's unlikely to cause issues in practice.

Thanks.

> On Jul 28, 2016, at 14:56 , Jacob Bandes-Storch <jtbandes@gmail.com <mailto:jtbandes@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> How about "for item in someOptionalContainer ?? " ?
>
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Rick Mann via swift-users <swift-users@swift.org <mailto:swift-users@swift.org>> wrote:
> I often call methods that return an optional collection. I then iterate over it. The problem is, it's a bit cumbersome to write:
>
> if let container = someOptionalContainer
> {
> for item in container
> {
> }
> }
>
> I wish I could just write
>
> for item in someOptionalContainer
> {
> }
>
> such that if the optional is nil, it just skips the iteration altogether.
>
> Is there a syntax for that (especially in Swift 3)?
>
>
> --
> Rick Mann
> rmann@latencyzero.com <mailto:rmann@latencyzero.com>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-users mailing list
> swift-users@swift.org <mailto:swift-users@swift.org>
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
>

--
Rick Mann
rmann@latencyzero.com <mailto:rmann@latencyzero.com>

_______________________________________________
swift-users mailing list
swift-users@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users

Zhao_Xin · July 29, 2016, 12:18am

You can try container?.forEach(), like

let bb:[String:Int]? = ["aa":1, "bb":2, "cc":3]

bb?.forEach { print($0) }

/*

("aa", 1)

("bb", 2)

("cc", 3)

*/

Zhaoxin

···

On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Saagar Jha via swift-users < swift-users@swift.org> wrote:

The nil check and creating an empty array have very similar performance,
in my naïve testing.

Saagar Jha

On Jul 28, 2016, at 14:59, Jacob Bandes-Storch via swift-users < > swift-users@swift.org> wrote:

You should test it out — I'd guess there's a good chance it gets optimized
out.
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:58 PM Rick Mann <rmann@latencyzero.com> wrote:

Yeah, I suppose that works. Feels a bit clunky, like the language lacks
specific support for this (in that it provides specific support for so many
other common constructs). But I guess I can make do with that.

I suppose there's a bit of a performance hit, in that constructing an
empty array and iterating over it is more expensive than a simple nil
check, but that's unlikely to cause issues in practice.

Thanks.

> On Jul 28, 2016, at 14:56 , Jacob Bandes-Storch <jtbandes@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>
> How about "for item in someOptionalContainer ?? " ?
>
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Rick Mann via swift-users < >> swift-users@swift.org> wrote:
> I often call methods that return an optional collection. I then iterate
over it. The problem is, it's a bit cumbersome to write:
>
> if let container = someOptionalContainer
> {
> for item in container
> {
> }
> }
>
> I wish I could just write
>
> for item in someOptionalContainer
> {
> }
>
> such that if the optional is nil, it just skips the iteration
altogether.
>
> Is there a syntax for that (especially in Swift 3)?
>
>
> --
> Rick Mann
> rmann@latencyzero.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-users mailing list
> swift-users@swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
>

--
Rick Mann
rmann@latencyzero.com

_______________________________________________

swift-users mailing list
swift-users@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users

_______________________________________________
swift-users mailing list
swift-users@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users

Kerry_Hazelgren · July 29, 2016, 6:21am

Like Rick, I had also wondered about a simple way to do this. Perhaps this is a question for swift-evolution, but wouldn’t it be desirable if Swift supported:

for item in someOptionalContainer?
{
}

which seems more natural and intuitive that the alternatives that have been suggested.

Kerry

···

On Jul 28, 2016, at 5:18 PM, Zhao Xin via swift-users <swift-users@swift.org> wrote:

You can try container?.forEach(), like

let bb:[String:Int]? = ["aa":1, "bb":2, "cc":3]
bb?.forEach { print($0) }
/*
("aa", 1)
("bb", 2)
("cc", 3)
*/

Zhaoxin

On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Saagar Jha via swift-users <swift-users@swift.org <mailto:swift-users@swift.org>> wrote:
The nil check and creating an empty array have very similar performance, in my naïve testing.

Saagar Jha

On Jul 28, 2016, at 14:59, Jacob Bandes-Storch via swift-users <swift-users@swift.org <mailto:swift-users@swift.org>> wrote:

You should test it out — I'd guess there's a good chance it gets optimized out.
On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:58 PM Rick Mann <rmann@latencyzero.com <mailto:rmann@latencyzero.com>> wrote:
Yeah, I suppose that works. Feels a bit clunky, like the language lacks specific support for this (in that it provides specific support for so many other common constructs). But I guess I can make do with that.

I suppose there's a bit of a performance hit, in that constructing an empty array and iterating over it is more expensive than a simple nil check, but that's unlikely to cause issues in practice.

Thanks.

> On Jul 28, 2016, at 14:56 , Jacob Bandes-Storch <jtbandes@gmail.com <mailto:jtbandes@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> How about "for item in someOptionalContainer ?? " ?
>
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Rick Mann via swift-users <swift-users@swift.org <mailto:swift-users@swift.org>> wrote:
> I often call methods that return an optional collection. I then iterate over it. The problem is, it's a bit cumbersome to write:
>
> if let container = someOptionalContainer
> {
> for item in container
> {
> }
> }
>
> I wish I could just write
>
> for item in someOptionalContainer
> {
> }
>
> such that if the optional is nil, it just skips the iteration altogether.
>
> Is there a syntax for that (especially in Swift 3)?
>
>
> --
> Rick Mann
> rmann@latencyzero.com <mailto:rmann@latencyzero.com>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-users mailing list
> swift-users@swift.org <mailto:swift-users@swift.org>
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users
>

--
Rick Mann
rmann@latencyzero.com <mailto:rmann@latencyzero.com>

_______________________________________________
swift-users mailing list
swift-users@swift.org <mailto:swift-users@swift.org>
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users

_______________________________________________
swift-users mailing list
swift-users@swift.org <mailto:swift-users@swift.org>
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users

_______________________________________________
swift-users mailing list
swift-users@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-users