On Sat, 25 Jul 2015 23:05:38 +0000, Jonathan M Davis wrote: >> Well, somebody was insisting and my PR's wouldn't get pulled without >> converting to it. Bluntly, I think insisting on using Flag instead of >> bool is not worth the bother. > > Several of those with commit access seem to have taken a liking to it > and insist that it's best practice, and I'm not enthused about it > either. Maybe some of those same devs would like to have named arguments > as well. I don't know.
semi-OT: as D has no named args, and i want to stay compatible, i adopted some another bad style: myfunc!"use-x,do-y,skip-z"(...); i.e. using template with string arg and parse that arg in compile time. while this bloats binary, creating separate functions for each option set, it still allows me to specify user-readable function configs. small example: one of my parsing functions has alot of options (i need 'em to correctly parse both xpath and css), and looks like this: lex.nextToken!"spacetokens,comments,no-numbers,extids"(); with named args that can be simple: lex.nextToken(spacetokens:true,comments:false<,etc...>); while this can be done with Flag, of course, what named args can give me is the ability to pass arguments in any order i like -- compiler knows the names and will sort 'em. still nice syntax, no template bloat. of course, there are other solutions to this, but the only one that doesn't require additional code in lexer is named args one.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
