Sujet : Re: "A diagram of C23 basic types"
De : already5chosen (at) *nospam* yahoo.com (Michael S)
Groupes : comp.lang.cDate : 10. Apr 2025, 09:37:30
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <20250410113730.000005a3@yahoo.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
User-Agent : Claws Mail 3.19.1 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:53:40 +0200
David Brown <
david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
Still, the C++ crowd regularly try to figure out how named parameters
could be added to C++. I think they will figure it out eventually.
C++ adds a number of extra complications here that C does not have,
but once they have a decent solution, C could probably adopt it. Let
C++ pave the way on new concepts, and C can copy the bits that suit
once C++ has done the field testing - that's part of the C standard
committee philosophy, and a good way to handle these things.
I think that it's not mere "extra complications". Adding named
parameters to C++ is massively more complicated than adding them to C.
So, IMHO, if C waits for C++ then it will wait forever.
Not that I care. Named parameters are pretty low on my wish list.