RE: [boost] Re: [Review] Named parameters library

From: Noah Stein (noah_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-11-17 19:37:10

> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]
> On Behalf Of Thorsten Ottosen
> Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 6:23 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: [boost] Re: [Review] Named parameters library

> that's pretty close. For those aguments that has reasonable defaults, I'm
> suggesting that
> the defaults can be overridden explicitly later.
> 
> But to be fair, this idea is far from new and so I'm not the person that
> should be given credit.

The point I've tried to make is that sometimes there is no second chance to
construct an object.  At times, I have one shot at initializing hardware.
There is no second chance.  I can't just default construct and change the
settings later.  At lost not without completely shutting down the hardware
and restarting it.  That's just not an option.  I can't refactor the
hardware.

In addition, what about dealing with libraries?  For example, the BGL has a
function named brandes_betweenness_centrality that takes 9 parameters.  I
would be hesitant to try to refactor the BGL locally on my machine.  My
other option is construct a separate class in order to collect the
parameters and make the call later.  I think the custom forwarding class is,
although similar, inferior.

-- Noah