- Proposal: SE-0061
- Author: Timothy J. Wood
- Status: Accepted for Swift 3 (Bug)
- Review manager: Dave Abrahams
The autoreleasepool
function in the standard library does not currently
support a return value or error handling, making it difficult and error-prone
to pass results or errors from the body to the calling context.
Swift-evolution thread: A first call for discussion was made here. Dmitri Gribenko pointed out that adding a generic return type would be useful (first in my premature pull request) and then also here. Jordan Rose pointed out that care was needed to avoid inferring an incorrect return type for the body block, but after testing we confirmed that this is handled correctly by the compiler.
The current signature for autoreleasepool
forces the creation of temporary
variables to capture any results of the inner computation, as well as any error
to eventually throw, in the case they are needed in the calling code. This extra
boilerplate clutters up the intent, as well as introduces the risk of
accidentally unwrapping a nil
value.
For example:
func doWork() throws -> Result {
var result: Result? = nil
var error: ErrorProtocol? = nil
autoreleasepool {
do {
... actual computation which hopefully assigns to result but might not ...
} catch let e {
error = e
}
}
guard let result = result else {
throw error!
}
return result!
}
I'd like to propose altering the signature of the standard library
autoreleasepool
function to allow for a generic return type, as well as
allowing a throw
of an error:
public func autoreleasepool<Result>(@noescape body: () throws -> Result) rethrows -> Result
The case above becomes much more clear and less error-prone since the compiler can enforce that exactly one of the error and result are used:
func doWork() throws -> Result {
return try autoreleasepool {
... actual computation which either returns or throws ...
}
}
As an aside, since this proposes changing the signature already, I would like
to further propose changing the argument label from code
to body
. This seems
more in line with the parameter name used in the rest of the standard library,
but isn't central to this proposal.
The updated standard library function would read:
public func autoreleasepool<Result>(@noescape body: () throws -> Result) rethrows -> Result {
let pool = __pushAutoreleasePool()
defer {
__popAutoreleasePool(pool)
}
return try body()
}
No impact expected.
The original request, SR-842 only
suggested adding throws
, but Dmitri Gribenko pointed out that adding a generic
return type would be better.
Further discussion raised the question of whether autoreleasepool
should
behave like a statement
in the future, or whether it should behave like an expression by returning the
result of the passed in body, with some weighing in on either side.
Chris Lattner drew an analogy to forEach
and pointed out that @autoreleasepool
is a statement in Objective-C, while
Jordan Rose found this case more like withCString
, or
withUnsafeMutablePointer
,
where having them return a value yields nice simplifications and avoids optional
var
s.
I also explored whether third-party code could wrap autoreleasepool
themselves
with something like:
func autoreleasepool_generic<ResultType>(@noescape code: Void throws -> ResultType) rethrows -> ResultType {
var result:ResultType?
var error:ErrorProtocol?
autoreleasepool {
do {
result = try code()
} catch let e {
error = e
}
}
if let result = result {
return result
}
throw error! // Doesn't compile.
}
but this doesn't compile, since in a function with rethrows
, only the call to
the passed in function that is marked as throws
is allowed to throw.
Even if it was possible to create a rethrows
wrapper from the non-throwing
function, it is better to add the safety to the standard library in the
first place.