preparing for named arguments

aliak something at something.com
Tue Aug 27 07:09:44 UTC 2019


On Monday, 26 August 2019 at 23:46:51 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>
> This is exactly one of the reasons why I think that named 
> arguments are a terrible idea. Now, we get to bikeshed about 
> what the "official" name is that we should be naming all of 
> these range parameters in order to be consistent and how we 
> should deal with naming them when there are multiple range 
> arguments. None of this mattered previously. As long as the 
> name was reasonable, it was irrelevant, and even then, it 
> really only mattered for documentation purposes and for making 
> the function internals reasonable to maintain.

Yes I understand you don't want named parameters :) I think the 
benefits far outweigh this negative (plus I agree with rikki). 
But if they do go in without opt-in, then my question still 
stands?

>
> - Jonathan M Davis




More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list