nim has both overloading and named arguments (with reordering and defaults allowed): http://nim-lang.org/docs/tut1.html#procedures-named-arguments

and it doesn't seem to cause issues.

Is there a document / thread that explains the argument against named arguments in more details than 'do not play well together' ?

On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 10:45 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-learn <digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com> wrote:

On Monday, June 08, 2015 20:36:05 Yuxuan Shui via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> Is there any reasons/difficulties for not implementing named
> parameters?
>
> There is clearly a need:
>
> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/wokfqqbexazcguffwiif@forum.dlang.org#post-pxndhoskpjxvnoacajaz:40forum.dlang.org

Function overloading and named arguments do not play well together, and we
have function overloading, so we're not going to have named arguments.
Walter made that clear at dconf. Now, as Idan pointed out in his reply, work
has been done implement them via a library solution for those that want to,
so you might get something there, but not in the language itself.

- Jonathan M Davis