[OT] Swift removing minor features to piss me off

[Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d]

On 2016-04-29 00:37, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:

> Of course, in an ideal world you'd have a "forever" keyword instead, but
> using up an entire keyword just for this one specific kind of loop seems
> a little excessive. So for(;;) seems like the perfect balance between
> idealism and practicality to me.

In an ideal world the language would support trailing delegate syntax 
allowing this to work without any language support:

forever {
}

Translated to:

forever({

});

I'm pretty sure Swift supports trailing delegate syntax.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg