Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C vs Haskell for XML parsing
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2023 06:58:54 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <86edjnxo81.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <576801fa-2842-40dc-bf19-221a5b1cf660n@googlegroups.com> <uc5mlk$32gl3$1@dont-email.me> <8eec8404-4928-4bc3-8b00-c673ea22ab60n@googlegroups.com> <uc7l4o$3fp72$1@dont-email.me> <639e8e6f-2729-476b-9a6e-0b3eb066b06an@googlegroups.com> <uc9m7v$3u797$1@dont-email.me> <d3c6df71-7ef5-4fd3-83be-8b9a4315f0c4n@googlegroups.com> <uca3sh$p9c$1@dont-email.me> <878r9zeynn.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <AUaGM.174236$JG_b.91752@fx39.iad> <ucbjph$96fa$1@dont-email.me> <ipdGM.457101$xMqa.238959@fx12.iad> <uccitk$hhuj$1@dont-email.me> <H2oGM.827787$TPw2.680260@fx17.iad> <ucd5kt$kl1p$1@dont-email.me> <20230826123929.770@kylheku.com> <ucdp4i$ot46$1@dont-email.me> <20230826210521.20@kylheku.com> <ucf86t$14b70$1@dont-email.me> <20230827151627.814@kylheku.com> <87edjocbqj.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="61b7a310fb4086afc4b0d02730d52894"; logging-data="1823570"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18m13qKOhiRBgEIc79NSuah2zLz6cazdrU="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ge3GRoYW8hwK0RepMmahzNL0JG0= sha1:KUFkhtDudP20TbG9YlthOTKKbH8=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:172999

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:

> Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> writes:

[named function arguments]

>> The only way this can be sanely introduced into C with backward
>> compatibility is if there is a separate way to introduce the
>> parameter names used for named calling, like this:
>>
>>   char *strcpy(const char * : dest, char * : src);
>
> Why not just declare
>     char *strcpy(const char *dest, char *src);
> and use those names in calls, with a few simple rules for when there's
> more than one visible declaration?

Amusing that both of thesse declarations get the qualifiers
wrong.

I favor a different approach to this problem:

    static inline char *
    copy_to_from( char *to, const char *from ){
        return  strcpy( to, from );
    }

with no language changes needed.  And people are still free to
use the more concise form if they so desire.