Having 10 different constructors to simulate default arguments becomes really hard to maintain when you want to modify the structure.  I realize this is probably very difficult but I think its very important, it would make life _alot_ easier.

Also could you put ( im not sure what you call this )

operator char [] () {}

and the like on the wish list ?


Lets all ask walter to give us default arguments, rally round the flag!

C

In article <bpmn7d$145f$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Charles Sanders says...
>
>Having 10 different constructors to simulate default arguments becomes really hard to maintain when you want to modify the structure.  I realize this is probably very difficult but I think its very important, it would make life _alot_ easier.
>
>Also could you put ( im not sure what you call this )
>
>operator char [] () {}
>
>and the like on the wish list ?
>
>
>Lets all ask walter to give us default arguments, rally round the flag!
>
>C
>
>

Default arguements would be nice to have, as long as they could be spread throughout the function declaration instead of just at the end. I always had trouble with remembering to put them at the end (gotta love compiler freak outs =P)

[...]
> 
> Default arguements would be nice to have, as long as they could be spread
> throughout the function declaration instead of just at the end. 

That would require named argument support.

> I always had trouble with remembering to put them at the end (gotta love compiler freak outs
> =P)

That's not so bad, if the compiler can remind you. One is more concerned  about subtle runtime errors that result (due to any feature), because the compiler has no problems with the code syntactically and semantically.

Cheers,
Sarat Venugopal

"Charles Sanders" <sanders-consulting@comcast.net> wrote in message news:bpmn7d$145f$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Having 10 different constructors to simulate default arguments becomes really hard to maintain when you want to modify the structure.  I realize this is probably very difficult but I think its very important, it would make life _alot_ easier.
>
> Also could you put ( im not sure what you call this )
>
> operator char [] () {}
>
> and the like on the wish list ?
>
>
> Lets all ask walter to give us default arguments, rally round the flag!


I'd welcome that, too. With even the named arg.
syntax, it would be fabulous...

Sz.

> > Having 10 different constructors to simulate default arguments becomes really hard to maintain when you want to modify the structure.  I
realize
> > this is probably very difficult but I think its very important, it would make life _alot_ easier.
> >
> > Also could you put ( im not sure what you call this )
> >
> > operator char [] () {}
> >
> > and the like on the wish list ?
> >
> >
> > Lets all ask walter to give us default arguments, rally round the flag!
>
>
> I'd welcome that, too.

I'll be into it, as long as someone can give a couple of compelling examples. We've not had any yet.

> With even the named arg.
> syntax, it would be fabulous...

Well, I'd like this with or without defaults.

We'll also need this in the template parameters, so as to avoid some of the nightmare workarounds in C++.