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

[Claude]

On Tuesday, 11 February 2020 at 09:46:35 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi 
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 February 2020 at 09:27:52 UTC, Andrea Fontana 
> wrote:
>> If package dependencies are used correctly nothing is break :)
>>
>> Andrea
>
> What I mean, is that multiple authors can be involved in the 
> necessary fix: it's not a matter of find/replace on your own 
> codebase.
>
> Let's put It simple, and let's boil this down to essential: 
> there's MORE probability of FUTURE breakage with named 
> parameters, and that's a fact.

Yes, precisely... I was a bit circumspect about named arguments 
(coming from the C world, I don't use them, and don't feel the 
need to), and I was agreeing with Jonathan point of view.

But I've changed my mind about it: I reckon naming things is 
quite important when writing a library. So that feature would 
make you think twice before naming a parameter, and care about 
how you name (and therefore design) things. So sure, it can break 
stuff, so that would probably be good if we could annotate 
parameter names with 'deprecated'.

And replacing the awkward 'Flag' template is a nice plus. 
Therefore I'm all for that DIP (and we can probably wait later 
for a design working with variadic arguments).