Can we drop static struct initializers?

[Leandro Lucarella]

Walter Bright, el 19 de noviembre a las 23:53 me escribiste:
> >It's not difficult to fix these compiler problems, but I'm just
> >not sure if it's worth implementing. Maybe they should just be
> >dropped? (The { field: value } style anyway).
> 
> Funny, I've been thinking the same thing. Those initializers are
> pretty much obsolete, the only thing left is the field name thing.
> To keep the field name thing with the newer struct literals would
> require named function parameters as well, something doable but I'm
> not ready to do all the work to implement that yet.

Is nice to read that you like the idea of having named function
parameters, even when you don't have the time or don't want to implement
them :)

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca)                     http://llucax.com.ar/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145  104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Que importante, entonces en estos días de globalización refregar
nuestras almas, pasarle el lampazo a nuestros corazones para alcanzar
un verdadero estado de babia peperianal.
	-- Peperino Pómoro