This would be great - just remove the braces, and the .’s, and the struct.
At this point it becomes an argument over syntax, rather than functional outcomes.
I think what the designated initialiser demo shows is that the language is capable of accommodating this idea.
I suspect the bigger argument will be over whether it should, given the additional overhead of passing carrying unnecessary optionals into a function whether it needs them or not.
I think it's common to think, "language X has a nice way of expressing Y - why don't we do that too?"
I can be guilty of that just like anyone else.
But in the end, if a language gives you a way to express intent, one might wonder whether it's worth expending effort in making syntax nicer for niche use cases in favour of providing more utility or fixing design bugs.
Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 2:10 AM, Richard Hodges via Std-Proposals <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:
Its possible something like this already exists in the latest versions of C++ but if so I am not aware of it
As of C++20, one could use designated initialisers to achieve this.
Whether it's a good idea in C++ is another matter.
--
Richard Hodges
office: +442032898513
home: +376841522
mobile: +376380212
--
Std-Proposals mailing list
Std-Proposals@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals