DIP 1019--Named Arguments Lite--Community Review Round 1

[Joseph Rushton Wakeling]

On Thursday, 28 February 2019 at 21:55:50 UTC, Olivier FAURE 
wrote:
> No, it mentions that having two @named prototypes for the same 
> functions with the same name and parameter types but different 
> parameters is allowed.
>
> eg: This is forbidden:
>
>     @named:
>     int foo(int x, int y) { return x + y; }
>     int foo(int w, int z) { return w + z; }
>
> and this is allowed:
>
>     @named:
>     int foo(int x, int y);
>     int foo(int w, int z) { return y + z; }
>
> The next iteration should probably make that distinction 
> clearer.

Is the idea here that you can effectively define "aliases" for 
the parameter names (e.g. to help transitions), but not have 
multiple function implementations with the same type signatures 
and different names?

That presumably impacts back on the mangling question, and 
whether the parameter names need to be included in the function 
mangling ... ?