On Jun 20, 11 03:03, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"KennyTM~"<kenn...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:it8f4s$1gve$1...@digitalmars.com...
On Jun 15, 11 00:45, so wrote:
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.
I'm just bringing up the fact. Why would you need to check the function
signature when reading
MoveWindow(hWnd, loc.x, loc.y, myWin.width, myWin.height,
bRepaint:true);
? It's clear what each argument does.
Because it might be wrong.
If you feel the need of duplicating the same information, fine, write
MoveWindow(hWnd:hWnd, X:loc.x, Y:loc.y,
nWidth:myWin.width, nHeight:myWin.height, bRepaint:true);
in your code. But don't make it mandatory, it's a waste of time and space
when the writer just wants to clarify that 'true' is a bRepaint.
I don't think anyone suggested named arguments should be manditory.
Right, no one suggested named arguments should be mandatory, but @so's
original suggestion is either "all on" or "all off", which makes this
example pretty much mandatory because of a 'bRepaint: true'.
