Re: Named params status

Am Sa. Feb. 22 2014 17:15:20 schrieb Patrick Schaaf: > On Saturday 22 February 2014 14:25:07 Andrea Faulds wrote: >> On 21 Feb 2014, at 19:49, Gleb Golubitsky <sectoid@gnolltech.org> 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 I agree with that post. For most, we can just create our own wrapper functions untill the functions have a real named parameter implementation (has_named_params() ?). The named parameters can then be added from time to time over minimal releases (5.6.?).