On Thu, 2023-08-17 at 11:34 +0200, Peter Herth wrote: > I think the omission of keyword parameters in Go is a weakness. In > many cases, keyword parameters are a simple way of creating APIs, > which depend on a lot of possible parameters, of which most are not > necessarily specified. Their omission is especially ironic, as there > is a strong push to initialize structs only via using the keyword > parameter syntax. And the reasons for that are very good. So when we > have a nice system - which essentially is just syntactic sugar at the > call site - for structs, why can't we have the same system for > functions? Like with structs, it should be mostly a syntax for > calling functions. They should probably be able to specify which > parameters are positional and which can be specified by keyword > parameters. > Of course you can do the common "trick" via generating a struct which > allows the keyword syntax for creation, but I think it would be a > good addition to not need that indirection.
A significant problem with additions like this is that people would use it. kwargs-rich functions enable overly complex APIs. I'm very glad Go doesn't have them. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/3a3163c2d6827bb2c40a850c2d24b39dced1285c.camel%40kortschak.io.
