I agree with Adrian here – the problem IMO is the fact that you can do `x <
5` *at all* if x is optional.
Allowing programmers to do `x? < 5` still doesn't make clear what the
actual result of the operation will be if x is nil. In fact, I would
actually *expect* the result of the operation to be a Bool?, not a Bool
which is always false if x is nil.
···
--
Tyler Mandry
thorsten
(thorsten@portableinnovations.de)
2
+1. I also think that < should not be defined for Optional.
-Thorsten
···
Am 06.12.2015 um 22:56 schrieb Tyler Mandry via swift-evolution <swift-evolution@swift.org>:
I agree with Adrian here – the problem IMO is the fact that you can do `x < 5` at all if x is optional.