Anonymous user
Talk:Named parameters: Difference between revisions
→Duplication?: expressing concern over overly narrow tasks
(→Duplication?: Crikey! What a mess in this area, probably caused by the task creator not knowing enough different languages) |
(→Duplication?: expressing concern over overly narrow tasks) |
||
Line 5:
:There is some duplication, yes, but it seems that the [[Optional parameters]] task was written by someone who wasn't aware of the possibility of optional positional parameters, which some languages support, so leaving that task still ambiguously defined. I'm trying to decompose features in this area so that these assumptions are teased out, and the naming of parameters is actually independent of supporting variable numbers of them (witness [[Objective C]]). Another justification for having them separate is that being able to set parameters by name leads to a different, far more literate programming style to setting them purely by position.
:Also note that the Tcl example in the [[Optional parameters]] task is wrong; there's another mechanism (optional positional parameters) that should be demonstrated there instead. I'll have to correct that. Bother… —[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 07:56, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
::When I wrote [[Optional parameters]] it was my intent that positional optional parameters were included in it; the text even says so. It was designed to be accomplished in many different ways (as opposed to, say, this task, which specifies the particular concept of named parameters).<br>I am concerned that the idea you mention of "decomposition" of features leads to many tasks which demonstrate single language features/properties, and entirely leave out languages which simply do not have those features -- and the whole point of RC is ''comparative'' programming, so this is undesirable; we should aim to have tasks which many languages can implement, ''using their own particular facilities''. --[[User:Kevin Reid|Kevin Reid]] 13:39, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
| |||