Discussion Thread: DIP 1030--Named Arguments--Final Review

[Timon Gehr]

On 19.05.20 04:35, Arine wrote:
> On Tuesday, 19 May 2020 at 01:07:38 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>> On 19.05.20 02:05, Arine wrote:
>>> On Sunday, 17 May 2020 at 13:25:35 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>>>> On 14.05.20 07:57, Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Besides, if you really don't want your users to use the parameter 
>>>>> names,
>>>>>
>>>>>      int foo(int _dkfjjiufheuehgthu, long 
>>>>> _yer_mother_was_a_hamster, double _I_did_not_read_the_documentation);
>>>>>
>>>>> and I bet they'll get the message.
>>>>
>>>> Or you can just use `int foo(int, long, double);`.
>>>
>>> Not that useful for open source code (the majority of D). Don't think 
>>> I even know of or have used a single library that only provides .di 
>>> files.
>>
>> int foo(int, long, double){
>>     return cast(int)(_param_0+_param_1+_param_2);
>> }
> 
> And that's better for readability? Both methods are equally as bad. That 
> one may be worse because it is an undocumented "feature".
> 

I am not sure what your point is. Are you trying to argue that the 
suggestion is on the same level or worse than the originally proposed

int foo(int _dkfjjiufheuehgthu, long _yer_mother_was_a_hamster, double 
_I_did_not_read_the_documentation);

?

If that is not your point, I think we have nothing to discuss.