Re: Allow interspersed named and positional arguments?

On Nov 27, 4:32 pm, nos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Richard Maine) wrote:
Fly Away <victor.proso...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Making this change would not provide substantial new functionality,
but I think it would be convenient, and it does not seem too difficult
for compiler writers to implement.
Even though I have very little understanding about how all this stuff
works at the low lever I am almost certain that object files do not
contain any info about the original variables' names. With the
exception of procedures like open, close, etc. So at least for
external libraries there is no way to get enough information for your
suggestion to work.

No, that is *NOT* an issue. You have to have an explicit interface for
anything like named arguments to work in the first place. That interface
provides all the necessary information. This is a compile-time thing
having nothing to do with object files. Sounds to me like you aren't
familliar with the existing f90 explicit interfaces and the things they
allow. That part is not new to Beliavsky's proposal.

I had some reservations, mentioned in my separate post, but they aren't
along this line. This part just isn't a problem.

Now that I read the original post again, I admit that I completely
misunderstood it in the first place.

After looking at my .mod files I see that all my silly var names are
right in there...

Victor.
.