preparing for named arguments

Kagamin spam at here.lot
Tue Aug 27 15:10:12 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.

Well, they are in the docs? So inconsistency is already exposed. 
But if current naming is reasonable, then renaming is not needed.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list