Out parameters and initialization

[Ivan Senji]

Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
> Yes, but this is a topic about a bug.  We are no longer really talking 
> about the bug.

Do we agree then that the bug is that
void f(out int x = 5) isn't an error?

> 
> If you used your workaround, you would have:
> 
> 1. Extra global variables somewhere in memory, which may not be desirable.

But as Regan said, possibly only one for each type.

> 
> 2. Uninitialized variables, from what I can tell (out parameters are 
> normally initialized to their default state at the beginning of the 
> function.)  This may cause unexpected/hard-to-reproduce bugs.

Same happens here.
void f(out int x = globalX) -> globalX is initialized to int.init.
No bugs here.

> 
> 3. Requirements to use synchronized blocks around accesses to the 
> variables, which would normally not be necessary with typical out 
> parameters.  This would be needed because the function may depend on the 
> global variables not changing mid-function, but the function might get 
> called numerous times concurrently in multiple threads.

I agree this is a problem in multithreaded enviroment.

> 
> It's true that programming involves the above all the time, but they can 
> all be avoided in this case by not using your described method.  As 
> such, I consider them flaws in the proposed method.

But there isn't any other way to solve what you wanted? Or is there?
I mean wanting not allways to pass out arguments to a function.
Atleast not other way without changing the language so that out default 
params are made strange and inconsistent.

But I agree this discussion sholud probably end soon :)