[swift-evolution] When to use argument labels, part DEUX (was: when to use argument labels (a new approach))

[Radosław Pietruszewski]

Dave,

First of all, thank you for enduring our nitpicks and complaints and continuing to explore the subject :) I think we’re all better off for it, and getting closer to the solution with each iteration.

You asked:

> 1. I'm not expecting these guidelines to make everybody optimally happy,
>   all the time, but they shouldn't be harmful.  Are there any cases for
>   which they produce results you couldn't live with?

And I think, by this standard, the guidelines you proposed seem to be a success. Looking through Doug’s diffs, I see a lot of method names that I don’t *love*, but I couldn’t find something I would hate.

* * *

> -  subscript (key: String) -> CKRecordValue?		+  subscript (keyedSubscript key: String) -> CKRecordValue?

Huh?

> -  func dateBySettingUnit(unit: CalendarUnit, value v: Int, of date: Date, options opts: CalendarOptions = []) -> Date?		
> +  func dateBy(settingUnit unit: CalendarUnit, value v: Int, of date: Date, options opts: CalendarOptions = []) -> Date?

That doesn’t look like the intended result...

— Radek

> On 05 Feb 2016, at 22:32, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> Given all the awesome feedback I've gotten on this thread, I went back
> to the drawing board and came up with something new; I think this one
> works.  The previously-stated goals still apply:
> 
> * describe when and where to use argument labels
> * require labels in many of the cases people have asked for them
> * are understandable by humans (this means relatively simple)
> * preserve important semantics communicated by existing APIs.
> 
> Please keep in mind that it is a non-goal to capture considerations we
> think have a bearing on good names (such as relatedness of parameters):
> it's to create simple guidelines that have the right effect in nearly
> all cases.
> 
> A. When arguments can't be usefully distinguished from one another, none
>   should have argument labels, e.g. min(x,y), zip(x,y,z).  
> 
> B. Otherwise,
> 
>  1. At the call site, a first parameter that has no argument label must
>     form part of a grammatical phrase that starts with the basename, less
>     any trailing nouns.  
> 
>       print(x)
>       a.contains(b)
>       a.mergeWith(b)
>       a.addGestureRecognizer(x)
>            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ trailing noun
> 
>     This phrase must have the correct semantic implications, so, e.g.
> 
>       a.dismiss(b)           // no, unless a is really dismissing b
>       a.dismissAnimated(b)   // no, not grammatical
>       a.dismiss(animated: b) // yes, using a label
> 
>  2. If the first argument is part of a prepositional phrase, put the
>     parenthesis immediately after the preposition. 
> 
>       a.encodeWith(b)
>       a.moveFrom(b, to: c)
> 
>     Thus, if words are required for any reason between the preposition
>     and the first argument, they go into the first argument label.
> 
>       a.tracksWith(mediaType: b, composer: c)
>       a.moveTo(x: 22, y: 99)
> 
> Notes: 
> 
> a. I would recommend prepositions other than "with" in nearly all
>   cases, but that's not the point of these rules.
> b. I can understand the aesthetic appeal of
> 
>    a.move(from: b, to: c)
> 
>   but I believe it is not a clear enough improvement to justify
>   additional complexity in the guidelines.
> 
> Questions:
> 
> 1. I'm not expecting these guidelines to make everybody optimally happy,
>   all the time, but they shouldn't be harmful.  Are there any cases for
>   which they produce results you couldn't live with?
> 
> 2. Are there any cases where you'd be confused about how to apply these
>   guidelines?
> 
> Thanks in advance for all your valuable input!
> 
> P.S. Doug is presently working on generating new importer results, based
>     on these guidelines, for your perusal.  They should be ready soon.
> 
> -- 
> -Dave
> 
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution