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

[12345swordy]

On Monday, 10 February 2020 at 21:41:02 UTC, Manu wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 1:30 PM 12345swordy via Digitalmars-d 
> <digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Monday, 10 February 2020 at 21:17:45 UTC, Manu wrote:
>> > On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 1:05 PM 12345swordy via 
>> > Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Monday, 10 February 2020 at 20:45:22 UTC, Manu wrote:
>> >> > On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 11:50 AM 12345swordy via 
>> >> > Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Monday, 10 February 2020 at 19:38:34 UTC, Manu wrote:
>> >> >> > On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 7:34 PM Jonathan M Davis via 
>> >> >> > Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> [...]
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I don't have any horse in this race... but I do just 
>> >> >> > want
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > echo that
>> >> >> > I don't understand this feature at all.
>> >> >> > I don't know what it's for. I've never felt I wanted 
>> >> >> > named
>> >> >> > arguments
>> >> >> > personally, and Jonathan's criticism feels very real to
>> >> >> > me.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > [...]
>> >> >>
>> >> >> For me personalty, readability\reliability is a huge 
>> >> >> factor here. Knowing what values should go to where is a 
>> >> >> big plus for me, when dealing with default arguments. I 
>> >> >> work with C# code when it comes to web development, and 
>> >> >> the default parameters prevent me sending values to the 
>> >> >> wrong parameter.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -Alex
>> >> >
>> >> > That feels like a pretty washy justification.
>> >> Manu, it boils down to mainly experience when it comes to 
>> >> wanting named arguments. I have argue in favor of them in 
>> >> the past already in other DIP. I have no interest of 
>> >> repeating them.
>> >
>> > I've seen some arguments, but I haven't understood them
>> > personally. I
>> > don't have a feel for their value, I can't judge that.
>> > I have described an important material loss associated with
>> > this. I'd
>> > like to see that important issue addressed in the form of 
>> > "use
>> > this
>> > pattern instead" or, "we accept we are abandoning that 
>> > important
>> > pattern, we feel it was less important than this DIP, and we
>> > accept
>> > code that uses that pattern will be broken", which,
>> > incidentally, is
>> > almost all D code I've ever written in a professional
>> > capacity... :/
>> >
>> > I also have a fear that where making parameter names part of
>> > the API;
>> > renaming parameter == breaking change, this feels bad to me.
>> > It's
>> > resistant to improving API clarity over time.
>> > In my experience, API clarity is an ongoing maintenance
>> > challenge,
>> > where your poor choice in names is only discovered some time
>> > later as
>> > you have experience with other humans sense of intuition
>> > differing
>> > from your own initial judgement.
>> > That argument is about equally washy as your core argument,
>> > except
>> > from my personal point of view, I know that my argument here
>> > absolutely applies to me frequently over decades of 
>> > experience,
>> > while
>> > I've never wanted names arguments once; so weighing the value
>> > judgement in that particular compromise seems obvious to me.
>>
>> Yes, I have encounter the "API breakage" counter argument in 
>> other threads already. Still not convinced that it is a big 
>> issue as they make it out to be.
>
> It's a huge problem today when a bad choice of function name is
> calcified; we'll be multiplying the probability of making bad 
> naming
> choices by 2-3x.
Which is a no big deal when the probability is very low to big 
with. Besides I don't need to justified it to you when are not 
the person who I need to be convinced in order for the dip to be 
accepted.

We literally have two named arguments DIP that are postponed for 
this DIP. The discussion has been made so many times already in 
which your concerns and objections has brought up time and time 
again. Which frankly I don't have time nor the energy to argue in 
favor it again when you can look into those discussions threads 
already.

There is no apocalypse scenario in C# community, when it comes to 
named arguments.

-Alex