Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2019 14:13:17 +0100
Hello
My first post!
*Parameter Names*
Don't you just hate it when you're reading code that looks like this and
no idea what those parameters are ?
func(true, false);
This is the function declaration - but it's a pain to go and find that:
void func(bool debug, bool log);
With this proposal, allowing inclusion of the parameter names makes it
clear:
func(debug=true, log=false);
What do you think?
Cheers, Jonny
ps. read the other proposals, but I feel this is simpler, clearer
http://open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2018/p0671r2.html
I don't think passing parameters in any order is a good idea though,
that makes it harder to identify any missing parameters (or accidentally
default initialized parameters)
https://www.fluentcpp.com/2018/12/14/named-arguments-cpp/
This one is the same/similar proposal as mine, so would support this style
https://marcoarena.wordpress.com/2014/12/16/bring-named-parameters-in-modern-cpp/
My first post!
*Parameter Names*
Don't you just hate it when you're reading code that looks like this and
no idea what those parameters are ?
func(true, false);
This is the function declaration - but it's a pain to go and find that:
void func(bool debug, bool log);
With this proposal, allowing inclusion of the parameter names makes it
clear:
func(debug=true, log=false);
What do you think?
Cheers, Jonny
ps. read the other proposals, but I feel this is simpler, clearer
http://open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2018/p0671r2.html
I don't think passing parameters in any order is a good idea though,
that makes it harder to identify any missing parameters (or accidentally
default initialized parameters)
https://www.fluentcpp.com/2018/12/14/named-arguments-cpp/
This one is the same/similar proposal as mine, so would support this style
https://marcoarena.wordpress.com/2014/12/16/bring-named-parameters-in-modern-cpp/
Received on 2019-07-06 08:15:13