www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

D - Param by Name X Param by Index

reply "Juarez Rudsatz" <juarez correio.com> writes:
D people :

 I dont remember if this was already discussed, but I wanna write about
Parameters by Index versus Parameters by Name

The problem which I have when programing, is a confusion with parameter list
of a function. Supose the following functions ( dont pay attention to sintax
yet):

char* substring(char* Source, int Start, Length) { }   (1)
char* substring(char* Source, int From, To) { }

char* replace(char* inString, Pattern, byPattern) { }  (2)
char* replace(char* Pattern, byPattern, inString) { }
char* replace(char* byPattern, Pattern, inString) { }

The first case the problem is the two meanings of same name "substring". The
second problem is the confusion about order of parameters.
When I am writing code, often I feel confused and need search the help for
"function definition".

S : Could be much more easy if I could call the funcions passing parameters
by name too. Consider the following examples :

(1)
  s = substring(Source=old_str, Start = MIDDLE, Stop = str_len(old_str));

or

 s = substring(old_str, MIDDLE, str_len(old_str) - MIDDLE);  // confusion
???

(2)
 r = replace(Pattern = 'C++' , byPattern = 'D', inString = 'C++ Programming
Language');

or

 r = replace('C++ Programming Language' , 'C++' , 'D');

Advantages :

1 - The order of parameters is not too important now. The definition of
function can change with none or lesser impacts.
2 - The programmer don't will need search by function in source code to see
the "definition". The code will be more easy to write.
3 - Programmers will not change, accidentally, the order, doing a mistake.
3 - The code could be more readable.
4 - The in, out and inout will not be affected
5 - The overloading will work as is now.

Disadvantages :

1 - The typing and code will grow.
2 - To change the parameters name will not be to easy as now, but they will
start have more significant names.
3 - The C programmers don't will like and will say : this is ugly.
4 - The matching parameter will have two algoritms increasing the compiler.

Problems :

a)
int somefunc(double base, int fator) {}
int somefunc(int base, double fator) {}

when I call the following example, the compiler will need to throw a error.
But It could know in semantic analysis time.

x = somefunc(base = 10 , fator = 2);

What you think about this ?
Comments, Sugestions, Negatives ?
Jan 09 2002
next sibling parent reply "Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> writes:
"Juarez Rudsatz" <juarez correio.com> wrote in message
news:a1hnec$1eap$1 digitaldaemon.com...


  I dont remember if this was already discussed, but I wanna write about
 Parameters by Index versus Parameters by Name


It was =)


 S : Could be much more easy if I could call the funcions passing


parameters

 by name too. Consider the following examples :

 (1)
   s = substring(Source=old_str, Start = MIDDLE, Stop = str_len(old_str));


Not suitable since = is an operator in D, and thus Source=old_str is
a legal expression.

However, : could be used instead:

    s = substring(Source: old_str, Start: MIDDLE, Stop: str_len(old_str));


 2 - The programmer don't will need search by function in source code to


see

 the "definition". The code will be more easy to write.


There are usually help files for that. Besides, you have to know
parameter names then, so you will still have to look at the declaration.


 What you think about this ?
 Comments, Sugestions, Negatives ?


It could be added as an alternative to the base syntax. Sometimes -
not very frequently though - it is useful. However, I wouldn't be
glad to type in all the parameter names.

Also, D allows to omit parameter names in prototypes. Not really
a big problem, still...
Jan 09 2002
parent "Juarez Rudsatz" <juarez correio.com> writes:
 s = substring(Source: old_str, Start: MIDDLE, Stop: str_len(old_str));


After send the post I was thinking in changing the char "=" by ":". Is a
good idea.


 It could be added as an alternative to the base syntax. Sometimes -
 not very frequently though - it is useful. However, I wouldn't be
 glad to type in all the parameter names.


If you are working with standart functions or methods or tiny methods this
is not very important, because you can remember fast the parameters. And the
help is in your hands ( or your finger F1 ). But when your code is growing,
you need sometimes search by method declaration for see what I need put in
list parameters.


 There are usually help files for that. Besides, you have to know
 parameter names then, so you will still have to look at the declaration.


Sometimes yes.
I have programming in M$/Sybase SQL, which use the both form, by Index and
by Name.
No rarely will dont remember the order or you mix the diferent order with
omiting the parameters.
This is not a problematic feature and maybe could not be to hard to
implement.

"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> escreveu na mensagem
news:a1hqag$1g8l$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 "Juarez Rudsatz" <juarez correio.com> wrote in message
 news:a1hnec$1eap$1 digitaldaemon.com...


  I dont remember if this was already discussed, but I wanna write about
 Parameters by Index versus Parameters by Name


 It was =)


Oh ! No !!!!!!!!!!
There are nothing new under the Sun !


 S : Could be much more easy if I could call the funcions passing


 parameters

 by name too. Consider the following examples :

 (1)
   s = substring(Source=old_str, Start = MIDDLE, Stop =




str_len(old_str));

 Not suitable since = is an operator in D, and thus Source=old_str is
 a legal expression.

 However, : could be used instead:

     s = substring(Source: old_str, Start: MIDDLE, Stop: str_len(old_str));


 2 - The programmer don't will need search by function in source code to


 see

 the "definition". The code will be more easy to write.


 There are usually help files for that. Besides, you have to know
 parameter names then, so you will still have to look at the declaration.


 What you think about this ?
 Comments, Sugestions, Negatives ?


 It could be added as an alternative to the base syntax. Sometimes -
 not very frequently though - it is useful. However, I wouldn't be
 glad to type in all the parameter names.

 Also, D allows to omit parameter names in prototypes. Not really
 a big problem, still...
Jan 09 2002
prev sibling parent "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
Named parameters is a good idea, it may go into V2. -Walter

"Juarez Rudsatz" <juarez correio.com> wrote in message
news:a1hnec$1eap$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 D people :

  I dont remember if this was already discussed, but I wanna write about
 Parameters by Index versus Parameters by Name

 The problem which I have when programing, is a confusion with parameter


list

 of a function. Supose the following functions ( dont pay attention to


sintax

 yet):

 char* substring(char* Source, int Start, Length) { }   (1)
 char* substring(char* Source, int From, To) { }

 char* replace(char* inString, Pattern, byPattern) { }  (2)
 char* replace(char* Pattern, byPattern, inString) { }
 char* replace(char* byPattern, Pattern, inString) { }

 The first case the problem is the two meanings of same name "substring".


The

 second problem is the confusion about order of parameters.
 When I am writing code, often I feel confused and need search the help for
 "function definition".

 S : Could be much more easy if I could call the funcions passing


parameters

 by name too. Consider the following examples :

 (1)
   s = substring(Source=old_str, Start = MIDDLE, Stop = str_len(old_str));

 or

  s = substring(old_str, MIDDLE, str_len(old_str) - MIDDLE);  // confusion
 ???

 (2)
  r = replace(Pattern = 'C++' , byPattern = 'D', inString = 'C++


Programming

 Language');

 or

  r = replace('C++ Programming Language' , 'C++' , 'D');

 Advantages :

 1 - The order of parameters is not too important now. The definition of
 function can change with none or lesser impacts.
 2 - The programmer don't will need search by function in source code to


see

 the "definition". The code will be more easy to write.
 3 - Programmers will not change, accidentally, the order, doing a mistake.
 3 - The code could be more readable.
 4 - The in, out and inout will not be affected
 5 - The overloading will work as is now.

 Disadvantages :

 1 - The typing and code will grow.
 2 - To change the parameters name will not be to easy as now, but they


will

 start have more significant names.
 3 - The C programmers don't will like and will say : this is ugly.
 4 - The matching parameter will have two algoritms increasing the


compiler.

 Problems :

 a)
 int somefunc(double base, int fator) {}
 int somefunc(int base, double fator) {}

 when I call the following example, the compiler will need to throw a


error.

 But It could know in semantic analysis time.

 x = somefunc(base = 10 , fator = 2);

 What you think about this ?
 Comments, Sugestions, Negatives ?
Jan 09 2002