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

[Adam D. Ruppe]

On Tuesday, 11 February 2020 at 13:52:35 UTC, Steven 
Schveighoffer wrote:
> Is there a plan to mitigate this limitation?

I wrote about this in github comments when the dip pr was first 
opened:

https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/pull/168#discussion_r324481363

lol actually you were the person to push back hardest! 
__traits(identifier) on the template param is a solid 
possibility, and the other push back is maybe making it opt-in... 
but with your __traits(identifier) add on.... no need for my 
weird struct thingy.

So basically the template variadic params would then work 
identically to the __parameters result we already have (probably 
including the slice technique lol). There's precedent!

That should absolutely work. And could be done right now to solve 
this in full - with the names being part of the variadic tuple it 
would forward to calls as well. I like it a lot.

But I still think this DIP as-is is an OK addition without it. We 
can always remove the T... limitation later as well.

though wow id really like to have it work.