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

[Paul Backus]

On Tuesday, 11 February 2020 at 15:26:42 UTC, Jonathan Marler 
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 February 2020 at 07:04:34 UTC, Walter Bright 
> wrote:
>> On 2/10/2020 3:20 PM, Jonathan Marler wrote:
>>> Will druntime/phobos try to come up with standard names for 
>>> these situations?
>
> For example, for math functions like the ones I mentioned, are 
> we going to normalize on "x", "y" and "z" depending on the 
> type?  And if it's a template that could accept any type, what 
> name would we use in that case?  Of course, if the answer to 
> the previous question is that we won't bother with functions 
> that don't make sense with named parameters, then this is a bad 
> example.  But the question still stands for functions that do 
> make sense, do you think we should come up with a standard set 
> of names to promote consistency accross the standard libraries, 
> and 3rd party libraries?

Here's a better example: functions like move and memcpy that take 
source and destination arguments. Currently, move uses 'source" 
and "target", but memcpy uses "s2" and "s1".