What do you guys think about aliasing the type of the current object with
the Self keyword?
E.g. instead of writing
class Test {
static var value = 0
func printValue() {
print(Test.value)
}
}
One could write
class Test {
static var value = 0
func printValue() {
print(Self.value)
}
}
It's dangerous to go alone. Take this with you.
-- E
On May 22, 2016, at 12:24 PM, Adam Nemecek via swift-evolution <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
What do you guys think about aliasing the type of the current object with the Self keyword?
E.g. instead of writing
class Test {
static var value = 0
func printValue() {
print(Test.value)
}
}One could write
class Test {
static var value = 0
func printValue() {
print(Self.value)
}
}_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
Lol, I'll search harder next time. :-)
On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 11:30 AM, Erica Sadun <erica@ericasadun.com> wrote:
https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0068-universal-self.md
It's dangerous to go alone. Take this with you.
-- E
On May 22, 2016, at 12:24 PM, Adam Nemecek via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
What do you guys think about aliasing the type of the current object with
the Self keyword?E.g. instead of writing
class Test {
static var value = 0func printValue() {
print(Test.value)
}
}One could write
class Test {
static var value = 0func printValue() {
print(Self.value)
}
}_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
swift-evolution@swift.org
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution