Boost logo

Boost :

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
> declarations...

I'm curious why we couldn't use => (or <-) to separate parameter names
and values.

> 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

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at