this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2026
24 points (100.0% liked)

Rust

8294 readers
32 users here now

Welcome to the Rust community! This is a place to discuss about the Rust programming language.

Wormhole

!performance@programming.dev

Credits

  • The icon is a modified version of the official rust logo (changing the colors to a gradient and black background)

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
snowe@programming.dev
Ategon@programming.dev
EdTheLegendary@programming.dev
torcherist@programming.dev
24
Arguing about arguments (steveklabnik.com)
submitted 2 days ago by codeinabox@programming.dev to c/rust@programming.dev
19 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No.

[–] Varesti@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago (3 children)

YES!

[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Is this the 5 minute argument?

[–] Varesti@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Well it WAS the 5 second argument.

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Is it when you pick up an argument someone dropped?

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 2 points 2 days ago

I don't know, it looks like the amount of issues is way higher than improvement in comfort. Beside, they mentioned a lot of corner cases that would definitely show up and become a problem

I've been using C++ for quite some time, and it also had some talks about having named parameters, but it only helps in some places and hinders in most, imo. I feel like in Rust you may use a struct as parameter containing all of function parameteres where you really want the names