<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Abstraction Algorithm : From Named Parameters to Point Free Form</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cdiggins.com/2007/03/19/abstraction-algorithm-from-named-parameters-to-point-free-form/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cdiggins.com/2007/03/19/abstraction-algorithm-from-named-parameters-to-point-free-form/</link>
	<description>Christopher Diggins</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 19:47:57 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Max Lybbert</title>
		<link>http://cdiggins.com/2007/03/19/abstraction-algorithm-from-named-parameters-to-point-free-form/#comment-198</link>
		<dc:creator>Max Lybbert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2007 20:27:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cdiggins.com/2007/03/19/abstraction-algorithm-from-named-parameters-to-point-free-form/#comment-198</guid>
		<description>As you know from recent email exchanges, I've just finished reading "Design and Evolution of C++."  There is a lot of interesting material in there, even for people who don't like C++.

Interestingly, the C++ committee once considered adding named parameter passing to the language, and decided a halfway intelligent implementation could simply transform the argument list into a "pass by position" system during parsing.  That is, the actual function call system would stay the same, but the parser would simply be smarter and translate from the pass by name into pass by position.

However, because C++ allows you to name parameters differently in the header and the implementation (precisely because of the way parameters are usually passed by position), the committee couldn't decide *which* names to use (the ones in the header, or the ones in the implementation, or both, ...).

Anyhow, turns out this is one of those nice features you need to add early if you hope to avoid meeting the devil in the details.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As you know from recent email exchanges, I&#8217;ve just finished reading &#8220;Design and Evolution of C++.&#8221;  There is a lot of interesting material in there, even for people who don&#8217;t like C++.</p>
<p>Interestingly, the C++ committee once considered adding named parameter passing to the language, and decided a halfway intelligent implementation could simply transform the argument list into a &#8220;pass by position&#8221; system during parsing.  That is, the actual function call system would stay the same, but the parser would simply be smarter and translate from the pass by name into pass by position.</p>
<p>However, because C++ allows you to name parameters differently in the header and the implementation (precisely because of the way parameters are usually passed by position), the committee couldn&#8217;t decide *which* names to use (the ones in the header, or the ones in the implementation, or both, &#8230;).</p>
<p>Anyhow, turns out this is one of those nice features you need to add early if you hope to avoid meeting the devil in the details.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
