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