# Easy strongified weak \`self\` in closures

**URL:** <https://forums.swift.org/t/easy-strongified-weak-self-in-closures/16767>\
**Category:** Pitches\
**Tags:** weakify\
**Created:** [October 7, 2018, 6:58am UTC](https://forums.swift.org/t/easy-strongified-weak-self-in-closures/16767 "2018-10-07T06:58:34Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 6

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tino](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/swift/user_avatar/forums.swift.org/tino/32/1073_2.png) [@Tino](https://forums.swift.org/u/Tino)\
**Post date:** [October 7, 2018, 10:10am UTC](https://forums.swift.org/t/easy-strongified-weak-self-in-closures/16767/6 "2018-10-07T10:10:53Z")

</div>

Afair this has been discussed with `[guard self]` instead of `autoweak` ([[Proposal] Guarded self in closures](https://forums.swift.org/t/proposal-guarded-self-in-closures/5293), [Guarded closures](https://forums.swift.org/t/guarded-closures/11029)).  
It doesn't work with closures that return something, though: It might be possible to infer `nil` if the result is optional... but still, that's no general solution.  
I think it's very hard to come up with a really elegant solution, and next to impossible to avoid breaking compatibility (unless it can live alongside with the old behavior) - and even if all those concerns are addressed, the idea still has to survive the evolution process.

---

_[View the full topic](https://forums.swift.org/t/easy-strongified-weak-self-in-closures/16767)._