It's not clear whether we should support named arguments apart from record fields.
But since we'd already have the infrastructure, it's very easy to add. The only thing left is the design point regarding the declaration of named parameters. For the longest time, I have envisioned:
It's not clear whether we should support named arguments apart from record fields. But since we'd already have the infrastructure, it's very easy to add. The only thing left is the design point regarding the declaration of named parameters. For the longest time, I have envisioned:
As you can see, the current proposal (re-)uses
let
for the declaration. Obviously,field
andlet
would be mutually exclusive on parameters.The MVP does not include reordering actually!