[boost] Re: [Review] Named parameters library

From: Daniel James (daniel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-14 05:56:06

David Abrahams wrote:
> Daniel James <daniel_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>An advantage of this method is that it avoids the need for the
>>forwarding functions.
> 
> But the disadvantage of these schemes is that you lose the positional
> interface to f.  Now you're forced to use named parameters.

Personally, I'd prefer not requiring the forwarding functions. The
positional interface doesn't seem that useful. If it was then you
wouldn't need the named parameters. But I realise that this is a fairly
subjective opinion.

Of course, you could create a positional interface by using a forwarding 
function. But that defeats the point.

Daniel