nim has both overloading and named arguments (with reordering and defaults allowed): http://nim-lang.org/docs/tut1.html#procedures-named-arguments and it doesn't seem to cause issues.
Is there a document / thread that explains the argument against named arguments in more details than 'do not play well together' ? On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-learn < digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com> wrote: > On Monday, June 08, 2015 20:36:05 Yuxuan Shui via Digitalmars-d-learn > wrote: > > Is there any reasons/difficulties for not implementing named > > parameters? > > > > There is clearly a need: > > > > > http://forum.dlang.org/thread/wokfqqbexazcguffw...@forum.dlang.org#post-pxndhoskpjxvnoacajaz:40forum.dlang.org > > Function overloading and named arguments do not play well together, and we > have function overloading, so we're not going to have named arguments. > Walter made that clear at dconf. Now, as Idan pointed out in his reply, > work > has been done implement them via a library solution for those that want to, > so you might get something there, but not in the language itself. > > - Jonathan M Davis > >
