Re: Named params status
On Saturday 22 February 2014 14:25:07 Andrea Faulds wrote:
> On 21 Feb 2014, at 19:49, Gleb Golubitsky <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Sad to hear so. What exactly stops from having it in the mainline?
>
> While the named parameters implementation works, we'd need to update the
> function info headers for every single internal function, and make sure it
> matches the documentation. I think Nikita simply doesn’t have the time on
> his hands.
I know that I said it more nicely before.... That is stupidity.
Just release the feature for user code (self-written functions and methods).
Create a suitable variation of the internals function declaration macros that
expresses "this function has been vetted for named parameter usage, and refuse
to accept named parameters (FATAL) for any function not so vetted.
Then let the internal function vetting proceed at whatever pace it takes,
later.
If you first wait for each and every internal (and extension?) function being
converted, this will never happen.
best regards
Patrick
Thread (13 messages)