On Monday, 29 July 2013 at 17:28:57 UTC, Meta wrote:
On Monday, 29 July 2013 at 17:22:50 UTC, JS wrote:
I'm not sure how named parameters would solve the original
problem
Your original use case:
template t(T1..., T2...)
...
t!(a, b, c; d, e, f);
Becomes
//Some weird hypothetical syntax
template t(@name("T1") T1..., @name("T2") T2...)
{
...
}
t!(T1 = a, b, c, T2 = d, e, f);
but using a syntax like what I'm suggesting one can do stuff
like
...
I think these use cases would all work with named parameters.
I don't think that is very robust notation but if it is then it
would work.
Using ';' makes it obvious the next group is starting. In your
notation, it seems like there could be issues. What if T2 is a
local variable, then is that an assignment? If there is no
possible issues then I wouldn't mind having such a syntax...
anything is better than nothing.
