On Feb 27, 2008, at 5:22 PM, Steven Mascaro wrote: > Anyway, I'm sure you know the advantages (and disadvantages?) to > optional named arguments. I was just wondering whether they had been > considered for ES4, or if considered and rejected, then why. I've > searched the wiki and mailing list, but couldn't find anything. I also > remember some brief comments on it a short while ago, but can't find > them now.
I search like so: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Amail.mozilla.org+es4- discuss+%22named+parameters%22+brendan and found a thread where I sounded off on named parameters: https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es4-discuss/2007-March/000548.html Already you see people burning an object per call to simulate named parameters: foo({option1: "on", crud2: "dunno", frob: 42}) With destructuring parameters and unambiguous callsites, the object can be optimized away. There are other ways to optimize such objects away, for the sake of ES3 code. Point is we have never mustered a named parameter proposal in the face of existing practice that makes do without, and new forms such as destructuring parameters: function foo({option1, crud2, frob}) { ... } that reduce the pressure for named parameters, and have their own wins and motivations aside from named parameter ones. This is not to knock named parameters, just to explain why they never made it into a serious proposal in the modern ES4 era. /be _______________________________________________ Es4-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
