On 03/01/2011 01:03 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
 From the perspective
of the library user, it does provide some benefit, but I honestly do not think
that

func(x : 4, y : 5);

is easier to read than

func(4, 5);

Sure, you have to know what func's parameters are, but you have to know that
anyway. Only now, with named arguments, you have to care about what their
_names_ are in addition to what they're for. I do _not_ want to have to read
code which uses named arguments. It's just more clutter and more intellectual
overhead.

Sorry no, you don't *have* to. Nothing forces you to use them.
And again named params are a help for /reading/. You & Don argue on a wrong basis, as if (1) they were forced on writing (2) they were supposed to be a feature at writing time. Even you who don't want it would benefit from them at times: on the opposite of what you say above, named params /remove/ intellectual/memory load from programmers' minds/brains.

[It's like a fight against pocket calculators or the use of an encyclopedia to write a University thesis. (People should compute by hand and know all facts by heart.)]

Denis
--
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com

Reply via email to