On 24/07/2018 6:43 AM, kinke wrote:
On Monday, 23 July 2018 at 17:32:23 UTC, aliak wrote:
Can we just consider that named struct init syntax *is* a generated
named constructor?
If named arguments choose a different syntax then you have no
conflict. If they go with the same (i.e. option 2) then you have
seamless consistency.
+1. And hoping for the latter, seamless consistency.
Based upon my DIP that is in the queue for named arguments, it would be
trivial for this DIP to make it so a named parameter constructor can
override the default behavior and I think that this is the best way forward.
