Variadic convenience initialiser
Closed this issue · 5 comments
Benefits:
- Cleaner notation for literal sets (e.g.,
Set(1, 2, 3)) - Side-benefit of tidier singleton sets (e.g.,
Set(1))
Cautious 👍
I like the idea; the caution is due to the potential for ambiguity with other init forms. I think we should be ok, even for the case of singleton sets of arrays: Set([1, 2, 3]) would probably mean Set<Int>(1, 2, 3) and not Set<[Int]>([ [1, 2, 3] ]). But it’s worth testing thoroughly.
(And being able to parameterize Set by the specific type implies an escape hatch if there are problems.)
Ok, so Set<[Int]>([ [1, 2, 3] ]) actually doesn't even compile at the moment, because Array doesn't conform to Hashable! Interestingly though, Set([[1, 2, 3]]) does compile—but only in the presence of Foundation, because its type is inferred as Set<NSArray>.
Thus, I haven't been able to discover any case of surprising type inference yet. Hoping to open a PR to that effect soon.
Aha, good catch ✨