On 4 October 2016 at 12:55, David Brown wrote: > On 04/10/16 12:41, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> On 4 October 2016 at 10:21, David Brown wrote: >>> On 04/10/16 01:48, Martin Sebor wrote: >>>> In a recent review Jason and I discussed the style convention >>>> commonly followed in the C++ front end to annotate arguments >>>> in calls to functions taking bool parameters with a comment >>>> along the lines of >>>> >>>> foo (1, 2, /*bar_p=*/true); >> >> I like this convention at the call-site, otherwise "true" or "false" >> doesn't tell you much and you have to look at the declaration. > > Far and away the best solution would be for C++ to support named > parameters or named arguments: > > <http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2014/n4172.htm>
GCC is going to be written in C++03 for the foreseeable future.
