On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:18:09 +0300, KennyTM~ <kenn...@gmail.com> wrote:
loc.x on the caller side, it has no idea about function signature, and
you don't know if it was 10th or 2nd argument in function.
// definition
fun(int x, int y) {
}
// call
fun(x, y) // you need to check the definition if you think something
wrong with parameters the second time you come here
fun(y, x) // same
fun(x:x, y:y) // you know there is nothing wrong with parameters
fun(y:y, x:x) // same
If you have no idea about the function signature, you have no idea about
the parameter names either.
I think you are just resisting here, if you write a call once with named
arguments, you documented it in place, the next time you visit this call
all you need to see is in the call site.
You see the difference between variables and generic constants?
RECT bounds;
GetWindowRect(hWnd, &bounds);
writeln("Please enter the coordinates.");
auto x = readln().chomp().to!int();
auto y = readln().chomp().to!int();
auto width = bounds.right - bounds.left;
auto height = bounds.bottom - bounds.top;
MoveWindow(hWnd, x, y, width, height, bRepaint:true);
vs.
writeln("Resetting window dimensions");
...
MoveWindow(hWnd, X:0, Y:0, nWidth:800, nHeight:600, bRepaint:true);
Named arguments provides clarification when the argument itself (e.g. 0,
false, true) is meaningless. But with a variable which itself provides a
meaning, forcing named argument on _every_argument_passed_ is just
annoying.
Looks like i am just repeating myself but i don't understand how is pssing
constants meaningless and variables, and why do you even need named
arguments for those?
enum x=...
enum y=...
...
fun(x, y)
Yet all well-known languages that support named arguments that support
reordering also support hybrid. (C# 4, VB 6, Python, CLisp, ...)
This is not an argument.
