Anonymous user
Talk:Named parameters: Difference between revisions
3 kinds of tasks...
(3 kinds of tasks...) |
|||
Line 7:
::When I wrote [[Optional parameters]] it was my intent that positional optional parameters were included in it; the text even says so. It was designed to be accomplished in many different ways (as opposed to, say, this task, which specifies the particular concept of named parameters).<br>I am concerned that the idea you mention of "decomposition" of features leads to many tasks which demonstrate single language features/properties, and entirely leave out languages which simply do not have those features -- and the whole point of RC is ''comparative'' programming, so this is undesirable; we should aim to have tasks which many languages can implement, ''using their own particular facilities''. --[[User:Kevin Reid|Kevin Reid]] 13:39, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
:::So Kevin, would a task of "Function definition/Function call semantics and examples" be too wide a task? You might have noticed that after my initial question above, I thought it might be best to write something that might cover all such tasks and linked the Python entries of the other two to this one. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 13:55, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
::::Such a task is a different kind of thing, "explain your language" rather than "implement this specification". I agree that such tasks should exist (e.g. I wrote [[Eval]] and [[Variables]]), but they should be considered separately from "implement this specification" tasks like [[Optional parameters]]. [[Named Arguments]] I would say falls into a third category, along with e.g. [[List Comprehension]]: "given that your language has this feature, tell us about your particular variation".<br>In the course of writing this comment, I have changed my position: that third category is in fact valuable, and named arguments are a significant enough feature that they should have a task which focuses on them (e.g. comparing Common Lisp vs. Python vs. Objective-C would be enlightening as to the variations possible).<br>I still think that there are too-narrow tasks: for example the basic loop tasks in [[:Category:Iteration]] are such because they assume a particular family of iteration facilities: once you've been that specific, there is no room for interesting variation between languages, just syntax. --[[User:Kevin Reid|Kevin Reid]] 15:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
| |||