DIP 1030--Named Arguments--Community Review Round 1 Discussion

[Walter Bright]

On 2/6/2020 7:33 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> Well, I'll say again that I don't like the idea of having named arguments in
> the language, because it makes the parameter names part of the API,
> resulting in yet more bikeshedding and yet another thing that can't be
> changed without breaking existing code. Once in a while, named arguments may
> be useful, but for the most part, they're useful because a function has way
> too many parameters, in which case, the function should have been designed
> differently.
> 
> Unfortunately, since it's Walter who created the DIP, and a number of people
> do like the idea of named arguments, I expect that some form of this will
> make it in, but I still think that it's a bad idea.

I appreciate your thoughts on this. But I like the feature even if all it does 
is make the "Flag" template obsolete:

   https://dlang.org/library/std/typecons/flag.html

So instead of:

   foo(Yes.caseSensitive)

we'd write:

   foo(caseSensitive : true)

There's no overhead or cognitive load of an extra type, and it doesn't look stupid.