On Wednesday, 27 March 2013 at 03:29:24 UTC, Timothee Cour wrote:
Named parameters are only interesting if we can skip some
optional parameters.
This allows the python-like syntax of specifying only a subset
of
parameters; otherwise this isn't very interesting. This is used
heavily in python and makes code
* self-documenting
* avoids DRY (don't specify unused params)
* avoids boilerplate of introducing auxiliary option structs
and fields to it
Here are just 3 examples that hopefully will convince some that
named
params are useful and not ugly.
----
//inspired from python's matplotlib; many more options
configurable,
which are set to reasonable defaults
plot(x=1,y=2,color='red',width=3);
//here's another one (cf inspired by scons / waf build tools in
python)
compile(input=["foo.cpp"] , run=true, debug=true,
ldflags="-lcurl",
output_dir="build");
//other example: setting optional params in a classifier
trainSVM(input=X, labels=Y, C=1000, crossValidate=true,
loss=squareHingeLoss)
----
How is that any better than the monadic solution proposed in the
thread and that dn't require any language addition ?
