4 ms·

You could argue the same thing (forcing kwargs) for all Python functions/methods, although, that would make using your APIs very annoying. The `init` method

by flakes 1y ago

You could argue the same thing (forcing kwargs) for all Python functions/methods, although, that would make using your APIs very annoying. The `__init__` method for dataclasses are just another method like any other. As a general rule of thumb, I only start forcing kwargs once I'm looking at above 4-5 arguments, or if the arguments are similar enough that forcing kwargs makes the calling code more readable. For a small number of distinct arguments, forcing kwargs as a blanket rule makes the code verbose for little gain IMO.

masklinn 1y ago
> You could argue the same thing (forcing kwargs) for all Python functions/methods, although, that would make using your APIs very annoying. The `__init__` method for dataclasses are just another method like any other. While that is self evident at a technical level, it is not quite so from a clarity / documentary perspective: “normal” functions and methods can often hint at their parameters through their naming but it is uncommon for types, for which the composite tends to be much more of an implementation detail. Of course neither rule is universal e.g. the composite is of prime importance for newtypes, and indeed they often use tuple-style types or have special support with no member names.
vbezhenar 1y ago
> that would make using your APIs very annoying For Objective C, using named parameters is the only way to call methods. I don't think I read many critique about this particular aspect. IMO it's actually a good thing and increases readability quite a bit. For JavaScript/TypeScript React codebase, using objects as a poor man's named parameters also very popular approach. Also I'd like to add, that it seems a recent trend to add feature to IDEs, where it'll add hint for every parameter, somewhat simulating named parameters. So when you write `mymethod(value)`, it'll display it as `mymethod(param:value)`. So may be not very annoying. The only little thing I'd like to borrow from JavaScript is using "shortcut", so you could replace `x=x` with `x`, if your local variable happened to have the same name, as parameter name (which happens often enough).
- laserlight 1y ago
  To be pedantic, Objective-C doesn't have named parameters. Method names are composed of multiple parts, each corresponding to a parameter. Such design contributes to the method's readability and memorability. In contrast, Python methods have their own names, and parameter names are chosen as an afterthought. While there's no reason why Python methods couldn't be named in accordance with parameter names, unfortunately it hasn't been a part of Python's culture.
int_19h 1y ago
I find that anything above 2 arguments benefits from explicit keyword notation. With 4-5 arguments, especially when most of them are of the same type, it can be difficult to tell which is which.

You could argue the same thing (forcing kwargs) for all Python functions/methods, although, that would make using your APIs very annoying. The `__init__` method

by flakes 1y ago

masklinn 1y ago

> You could argue the same thing (forcing kwargs) for all Python functions/methods, although, that would make using your APIs very annoying. The `__init__` method for dataclasses are just another method like any other. While that is self evident at a technical level, it is not quite so from a clarity / documentary perspective: “normal” functions and methods can often hint at their parameters through their naming but it is uncommon for types, for which the composite tends to be much more of an implementation detail. Of course neither rule is universal e.g. the composite is of prime importance for newtypes, and indeed they often use tuple-style types or have special support with no member names.

vbezhenar 1y ago

> that would make using your APIs very annoying For Objective C, using named parameters is the only way to call methods. I don't think I read many critique about this particular aspect. IMO it's actually a good thing and increases readability quite a bit. For JavaScript/TypeScript React codebase, using objects as a poor man's named parameters also very popular approach. Also I'd like to add, that it seems a recent trend to add feature to IDEs, where it'll add hint for every parameter, somewhat simulating named parameters. So when you write `mymethod(value)`, it'll display it as `mymethod(param:value)`. So may be not very annoying. The only little thing I'd like to borrow from JavaScript is using "shortcut", so you could replace `x=x` with `x`, if your local variable happened to have the same name, as parameter name (which happens often enough).

laserlight 1y ago
To be pedantic, Objective-C doesn't have named parameters. Method names are composed of multiple parts, each corresponding to a parameter. Such design contributes to the method's readability and memorability. In contrast, Python methods have their own names, and parameter names are chosen as an afterthought. While there's no reason why Python methods couldn't be named in accordance with parameter names, unfortunately it hasn't been a part of Python's culture.

int_19h 1y ago

I find that anything above 2 arguments benefits from explicit keyword notation. With 4-5 arguments, especially when most of them are of the same type, it can be difficult to tell which is which.