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

[Paul Backus]

On Sunday, 7 April 2019 at 13:48:09 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote:
> On Sunday, 7 April 2019 at 03:09:23 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 3/31/2019 5:33 AM, Mike Parker wrote:
>>> [...]
>>
>> Here's a much simpler proposal, based on the recognition that 
>> D already has named parameters:
>>
>> [...]
>
> I thought people don't like opt-ins. Yet this DIP, your 
> proposal, and several other proposals in this thread are all 
> opt-in.
>
> Am I allowed to include the @named attribute in my DIP now? :)

Walter's proposal isn't opt-in. The declarations of `snoopy` in 
his example are just regular D function declarations; there's 
nothing special added to them to enable the use of named 
arguments.

This is, I think, conclusive evidence against the proposition 
that "W&A will only accept an extremely conservative, opt-in 
version of named arguments." So any further defense of syntax 
like DIP 1019's @named or DIP 1020's angle brackets will have to 
be based on their actual merits, rather than on the mistaken idea 
that they will make a DIP more likely to be accepted.