Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2023 23:58:10 +0000
On Wednesday, February 1st, 2023 at 7:39 AM, Andrey Semashev via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> In any case, my proposal is not about named arguments, it's about
> simplifying passing the defaults, that's it.
>
I understand that you see a problem, but
the outcome of the suggestion may need
to be verified. Consider a code base where
everything is passed via smart pointers.
You see a function call like this:
service->CreateConnection(nullptr, URL, nullptr, nullptr, payload, nullptr);
Every parameter, presumably other than
the first two, defaults to nullptr. Does
it help, to change the call into
service->CreateConnection(nullptr, URL, default, default, payload, default);
?
It looks like "explicit default" looks
equally good or bad compared to its prior
arts.
>
> In any case, my proposal is not about named arguments, it's about
> simplifying passing the defaults, that's it.
>
I understand that you see a problem, but
the outcome of the suggestion may need
to be verified. Consider a code base where
everything is passed via smart pointers.
You see a function call like this:
service->CreateConnection(nullptr, URL, nullptr, nullptr, payload, nullptr);
Every parameter, presumably other than
the first two, defaults to nullptr. Does
it help, to change the call into
service->CreateConnection(nullptr, URL, default, default, payload, default);
?
It looks like "explicit default" looks
equally good or bad compared to its prior
arts.
-- Zhihao Yuan, ID lichray The best way to predict the future is to invent it. _______________________________________________
Received on 2023-02-01 23:58:17