From: Kevin Cline (kcline_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-07 16:14:23
Andrei Alexandrescu writes:
> > I'm a big fan of having named (or keyword) parameters in the language.<
> Me too. Unfortunately it's late to introduce named parameters in C++ now,
> because it's very liberal with the names you give to formal parameters in
I'm curious why we couldn't use => (or <-) to separate parameter names
> The only reasonable way now is to come with a keyword to substitute for
> non-trailing default parameters. The obvious candidate is "default"; I would
> prefer a symbol (such as "?", "!") because "default" is quite a long word.
Why can't we just leave the default parameters out?
-- Kevin Cline, looking for work in Dallas http://members.bbnow.net/kcline
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk