SE-0345: `if let` shorthand for shadowing an existing optional variable

[xwu (Xiaodi Wu)]

@Douglas_Gregor

I'll speak on behalf of the Core Team here, because "when is a proposal ready for review?" is something we have discussed numerous times. We've been very explicit that the existence of controversy is not a reason to prevent a proposal from coming up for review. The reality is that some changes will be inherently controversial (especially with syntactic sugar), and no amount of pre-review discussion is going to change everyone's mind. The presence of controversy must not halt progress on the language.

This is interesting, because in earlier times the core team was explicit that lack of "strong" consensus did bar proposals coming to review. (See, for example, #438.)

[GarthSnyder]

To date:

• 39 reviews are wholly positive. This category includes the "not important, but sure, why not" votes.

• 13 people agree that there is a problem to be solved but would like to use or investigate a different spelling. This number includes the "-1 on this specific proposal" votes.

• 5 people were net positive but expressed either reservations or lukewarmness.

• 1 person was mildly negative.

• 14 people were negative.

• 5 people were uncategorizable; they wrote ambiguous text or expressed positions too nuanced for simple counting.

I tried to unique by poster, but this is a hand count and I'm sure that if you did your own, you would come up with similar-but-different numbers.

[John_McCall]

The review period is over. We’re still getting some late feedback, so I have no problem with leaving the thread open for people who haven’t posted yet, but I think the discussion should be considered over; if you’ve already left your feedback here, please refrain from further comment.

[Douglas_Gregor]

Hey all,

Thanks for the great discussion, experiments, and perspectives. The Core Team has decided to accept this proposal. See the decision notes for some commentary.

Doug