DIP 1020--Named Parameters--Community Review Round 1

[Atila Neves]

On Sunday, 31 March 2019 at 12:33:56 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> This is the feedback thread for the first round of Community 
> Review for DIP 1020, "Named Parameters":
>
> https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/39dbbbe5e4618abd4c4b41eb0edd16547858ddf5/DIPs/DIP1020.md
>
> All review-related feedback on and discussion of the DIP should 
> occur in this thread. The review period will end at 11:59 PM ET 
> on April 14, or when I make a post declaring it complete.
>
> At the end of Round 1, if further review is deemed necessary, 
> the DIP will be scheduled for another round of Community 
> Review. Otherwise, it will be queued for the Final Review and 
> Formal Assessment by the language maintainers.
>
> Please familiarize yourself with the documentation for the 
> Community Review before participating.
>
> https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/PROCEDURE.md#community-review
>
> Thanks in advance to all who participate.

> Contrary to the implementation of this feature in other 
> languages, this DIP does not allow arguments to be reordered. 
> The primary aim of this proposal is to aid in readability and 
> the implementation of tooling.

To me, this removes the main reason for wanting this feature in 
the first place.

> To delineate a named parameter, the parameter declaration is 
> wrapped in angle brackets such that bool o is a standard, 
> unnamed parameter and <bool o> is a named parameter.

There are known reasons why using angle brackets complicates 
lexing (cough! C++! cough!), so the syntax choice is odd. Is 
there a particular reason why the usage suggested here avoids the 
issues?