DIP88 Named Parameters, Status?

2017-09-30 Thread Jonathan Marler via Digitalmars-d
https://wiki.dlang.org/DIP88 I'd like to see DIP88 (Named Parameters) revived. Was this proposal rejected or is it just stale and needs a refresh? Named parameters can be implemented in a library, however, in my opinion they are useful enough to warrant a clean syntax with language support.

Re: DIP88 Named Parameters, Status?

2017-09-30 Thread Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
On Saturday, September 30, 2017 16:10:44 Jonathan Marler via Digitalmars-d wrote: > https://wiki.dlang.org/DIP88 > > I'd like to see DIP88 (Named Parameters) revived. Was this > proposal rejected or is it just stale and needs a refresh? Named > parameters can be implemented in a library, however

Re: DIP88 Named Parameters, Status?

2017-09-30 Thread solidstate1991 via Digitalmars-d
On Saturday, 30 September 2017 at 16:22:37 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: Effectively, all DIPs from that wiki that have not already been accepted are dead, regardless of whether they stand any chance of acceptance. For any DIP to be accepted, it will have to go through the new DIP process, whi

Re: DIP88 Named Parameters, Status?

2017-09-30 Thread Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
On Saturday, September 30, 2017 16:57:09 solidstate1991 via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Saturday, 30 September 2017 at 16:22:37 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > Effectively, all DIPs from that wiki that have not already been > > accepted are dead, regardless of whether they stand any chance > >

Re: DIP88 Named Parameters, Status?

2017-09-30 Thread Nicholas Wilson via Digitalmars-d
On Saturday, 30 September 2017 at 16:57:09 UTC, solidstate1991 wrote: On Saturday, 30 September 2017 at 16:22:37 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: Effectively, all DIPs from that wiki that have not already been accepted are dead, regardless of whether they stand any chance of acceptance. For any D

Re: DIP88 Named Parameters, Status?

2017-09-30 Thread Jonathan Marler via Digitalmars-d
On Saturday, 30 September 2017 at 22:37:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Saturday, September 30, 2017 16:57:09 solidstate1991 via Digitalmars-d wrote: On Saturday, 30 September 2017 at 16:22:37 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > [...] What about DIP45, or making export an attribute? That would

Re: DIP88 Named Parameters, Status?

2017-09-30 Thread Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
On Sunday, October 01, 2017 01:54:24 Jonathan Marler via Digitalmars-d wrote: > Hoping that someone will chime in and answer the original > question. It's likely that only Walter or Andrei can answer it. > > Is it a waste of time for me to put effort into renewing this > DIP? Is it dead on arriv

Re: DIP88 Named Parameters, Status?

2017-10-01 Thread Petar via Digitalmars-d
On Sunday, 1 October 2017 at 01:54:24 UTC, Jonathan Marler wrote: On Saturday, 30 September 2017 at 22:37:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Saturday, September 30, 2017 16:57:09 solidstate1991 via Digitalmars-d wrote: On Saturday, 30 September 2017 at 16:22:37 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: >

Re: DIP88 Named Parameters, Status?

2017-10-01 Thread Seb via Digitalmars-d
On Saturday, 30 September 2017 at 16:10:44 UTC, Jonathan Marler wrote: https://wiki.dlang.org/DIP88 I'd like to see DIP88 (Named Parameters) revived. Was this proposal rejected or is it just stale and needs a refresh? Named parameters can be implemented in a library, however, in my opinion

Re: DIP88 Named Parameters, Status?

2017-10-14 Thread Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
On 10/01/2017 06:51 AM, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote: On Sunday, 1 October 2017 at 01:54:24 UTC, Jonathan Marler wrote: On Saturday, 30 September 2017 at 22:37:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote: On Saturday, September 30, 2017 16:57:09 solidstate1991 via Digitalmars-d wrote: On Saturday, 30 Sep

Re: DIP88 Named Parameters, Status?

2017-10-15 Thread solidstate1991 via Digitalmars-d
On Saturday, 14 October 2017 at 14:49:27 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: Yes, we're up for that. We need a strong folow-up here (in the form of a formal proposal) from Benjamin and others interested. -- Andrei I myself might try to resurrect the issue (probably in the forum), as a better DLL