On 03/16/2015 05:06 PM, David Brown wrote:
Basically, the idea is this:int foo(int a, int b, int c); void bar(void) { foo(1, 2, 3); // Normal call foo(.a = 1, .b = 2, .c = 3) // Same as foo(1, 2, 3) foo(.c = 3, .b = 2, .a = 1) // Same as foo(1, 2, 3) } If only the first variant is allowed (with the named parameters in the order declared in the prototype), then this would not affect code generation at all - the designators could only be used for static error checking. If the second variant is allowed, then the parameters could be re-ordered.
This is indeed very useful - Fortran has this since the Fortran 90 standard, albeit without the dots (it's unambiguous in Fortran).
-- Toon Moene - e-mail: t...@moene.org - phone: +31 346 214290 Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands At home: http://moene.org/~toon/; weather: http://moene.org/~hirlam/ Progress of GNU Fortran: http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GFortran#news
