5 ms·
It's a shame Rust doesn't have keyword arguments or named tuples to make handling some of these things easier without Args/Options structs boilerplate.
by GardenLetter27 1y ago
It's a shame Rust doesn't have keyword arguments or named tuples to make handling some of these things easier without Args/Options structs boilerplate.
- shpongled 1y agoYep, I would love anonymous record types, ala StandardML/OCaml
- frankus 1y agoI work all day in Swift (which makes you go out of your way to omit argument labels) and I'm surprised they aren't more common.
- kevincox 1y agoYeah, this is one of the few things that I love about Swift. I think it gets it exactly right that keyword arguments should be the default and you can opt out in cases where the keyword is really unnecessary.
- jsat 1y agoHad the same thought... It's backwards that any language isn't using named parameters at this point.
- Ygg2 1y agoNamed parameters do come with a large footgun. Renaming your parameters is a breaking change. Especially if you're coming from different langs.
- const_cast 1y agoThis only really applies to languages that don't check this at compile-time. I don't consider compile-time errors a foot gun. I mean, it should be impossible for that kind of bad code to ever get merged in most reasonable CI/CD processes.
- Ygg2 1y agoNo? This happens in any language that has keyword args. If I delete/rename a field of a class in any statically checked language, it's going to report a compile error, and it's still a breaking change. Same thing with named arguments.
- const_cast 1y agoSure, but it doesn't actually matter because this can't ever manifest as a bug. Your PR will just be rejected, which to me, is correct behavior. Typically when you're changing a name you're changing behavior, too. This isn't just something we should let slip under the radar, otherwise bugs can actually manifest.
- Spivak 1y agoI guess but you're changing your user-visible API so it should be a breaking change. In languages that don't have this type/arity is all that matters and the name is just nice sugar for the implementor who doesn't have to bind them to useful names. Even if you don't use keyword args your parameter names are still part of your API surface in Python because callers can directly name positional args. Only recently have you been able enforce unnamed positional only args as well as the opposite.
- _flux 1y agoE.g. OCaml has the ability to separate argument name and variable name for named arguments: let foo ~argument:variable = variable + variable In fact, I think OCaml has one of the best labeled argument system around there. The only downside is that it doesn't always interact well with currying, but perhaps languages without currying could just copy all the rest. Just to elaborate a bit, in OCaml you can have functions like: let foo ~a ?b c = let b = match b with | None -> 42 | Some x -> x in a + b + c And you can then call this like foo ~a:1 ~b:42 55 or foo ~a:2 ?b:None 55. But then forwarding those optional parameters works like: let bar ~a ?b c = foo ~a ?b c and the optional parameter b will be forwarded as an optional parameter. Given Rust's historical relations with OCaml I'm slightly disappointed that it doesn't have the same labeled and optional argument system.
- dcdgo 1y agoRust Tuples can be destructured into named variables, or Enums can be used as Monads which give a label to a tuple of variables. Rust Enums are real fun to use so I encourage you to dive in. https://doc.rust-lang.org/rust-by-example/custom_types/enum.html?highlight=enums https://doc.rust-lang.org/rust-by-example/custom_types/enum....
- Gazoche 1y agoAgreed, coming from Python it's one of the main things I miss in Rust. You can achieve something similar with the builder pattern or with structs + the Default trait, but it takes much more effort.