The Weird and The Wonderful

Maunder said:

the need to explicitly name every input variable started grating.

Marc Clifton wrote:

And even worse, can you mix the two,

mock.expects(once()).method("m").with( or(stringContains("hello"),                                    stringContains("howdy")) );

CHANGENAME(D) THE DOG CHANGES NAME TO :( NEWNAME)

UIAlertView* alert = [[UIAlertView alloc] initWithTitle:@"Hello!"
                                                          message:@"Hello, world!"
                                                         delegate:nil
                                                cancelButtonTitle:@"Close"
                                                otherButtonTitles:nil];

Cat cat = new Cat(){ Name = "Whiskers" };

ChangeName( of: cat, to: "Fluffy" );

// OR

ChangeName( to: "Fluffy", of: cat );

public STATIC void ChangeName(IRenameable of, string to) {
   of.Name = to;
}

public interface IRenameable {
   string Name {get;set;}
}

public class Cat: IRenameable {
   public string Name {get;set;}
}

Jon McKee wrote:

requiring named parameters in absence of "anonymous" ones? FeelsBadMan

Quote:

IMHO it's requiring coders do what's basically IDE's job.

kennel changeNameOf: d To: 'Fido'.

Rob Grainger wrote:

Smalltalk had similar readability, achieved differently

if (payer.hasSpecialAbility){
    // do stuff
}