While names arguments like foo(x= 1.0, y = 23) may look like syntactic sugar, I think you are right that they improve readability, especially of long argument lists. The counter argument I suppose if that you could pass structs around, but that gets ugly fast.
Thinking about how this would be implemented in Go, I wonder if it would be better for unnamed arguments (assuming they are allowed) to adopt the default values, or whether the function definition should include default values like Python. I find the default values in the function definition to be hard to discover, but that is mostly because I find Python docs hard to read. Thank you for posting this very interesting experience report. Jon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/a8b2896a-19e3-4b94-8a5d-811a43ec4f45%40googlegroups.com.
