Re: Syntax question

[dkusu@atc-1s.hac.com (David Kusuda)]

In article dim@felix.seas.gwu.edu, mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) writes:

[snip]

>The named association is very convenient in teaching about parameters,
>and makes for nice readable code (IMHO, of course), but in general is
>really "syntactic sugar." 

I agree with Michael's points regarding named parameter association.  But the named
parameter association is also necessary to:

  a) Specify the parameter list in an arbitrary order--I think this is a weak point
     as far as readability/maintainability, but still a point.
  b) Omit parameters which have default values.  I think that this is very useful,
     too bad C++ doesn't have the same thing.



Dave