DIP 1019--Named Arguments Lite--Community Review Round 2

[Atila Neves]

On Sunday, 9 June 2019 at 07:55:50 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 6/8/19 3:58 PM, Yuxuan Shui wrote:
>> 
>> Reordering is definitely a very important feature. However, 
>> this proposal is not going to be the last DIP about named 
>> parameters, as is stressed in the proposal itself.
>> 
>> Generally, I think incremental improvements should be allowed.
>
> Sadly my vast and mostly unsuccessful experience with 
> programming language design is that such is not to be done 
> incrementally. Never. I will oppose a DIP that argues its 
> utility by means of possible future DIPs. (For measure, don't 
> forget I do not hold decision power any longer.) For named 
> arguments, I very strongly believe that any DIP that does not 
> allow reordering is a stillborn.

I agree. Reordering is the main motivation. I've lost count of 
how many times I've shaken my fist at the sky when trying to 
change the working directory when calling std.process.execute.