DIP 1020--Named Parameters--Community Review Round 2

[rikki cattermole]

On 17/09/2019 8:38 PM, M.M. wrote:
> On Monday, 16 September 2019 at 11:32:35 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> The above ignores things like memory management but it does give a 
>> basic overview of why Walter's design doesn't do anything for my 
>> design of signatures.
> 
> But if I understand it correctly, Walter's design also does not stand in 
> bringing a design of signatures?

It does not no.

My current design which I created as a backup to DIP1020 which supports 
his, I do not believe fits in with the current design of signatures.

I.e.

struct Foo(public T) {
}

static asssert(Foo!(T: int).T == int);