Order of evaluation for named arguments
Ogion
ogion.art at gmail.com
Thu Apr 3 14:41:58 UTC 2025
On Thursday, 3 April 2025 at 12:40:54 UTC, GrimMaple wrote:
> As a side note, it's probably wise to issue a warning when
> someone does 'no hire' stuff anyway, eg this code:
> ```d
> int t = 1;
> auto z = t++ + ++t;
> ```
> Should explicitly state that:
> ```
> Warning: variable `t` is modified several times within one
> sequence point, consider refactoring.
> ```
Some newer languages don’t have increment/decrement expressions.
These expressions are great for writing “clever” code, and nobody
likes reading and debugging “clever” code. And in trivial cases,
`i++` is not *that* much better than `i += 1` to justify the
additional language complexity and potential for misuse.
Maybe we could deprecate them altogether. But I imagine the
pushback.
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list