"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> wrote in message news:mailman.781.1307734245.14074.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > On 2011-06-10 09:15, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: >> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/94 >> >> Discuss! > > I do have to admit that as much as I hate the idea of named parameters, > this > particular proposal certainly seems to be an argument in favor of adding > them, > which would tend to argue against making these changes. > > After thinking about it, I'd argue that it would be better to create a > string > mixin which created the enums for you instead of using the template as > part of > the arguments. e.g. > > mixin(YesNoEnum!"KeepTerminator")); > > Then all of the rest of the code is the same. You'd still use > KeepTerminator.yes and KeepTerminator.no, but we avoided having to create > duplicate enums by hand every time that we want this kind of variable. So, > you > still reduce the boilerplate code, but the usage is much less ugly. >
I'd support this *as long as* it's existence didn't get used as rationalization for avoiding the inclusion of named arguments.