Thinking more about this, I'm realizing that Swift was probably transitively inspired by Smalltalk; although I don't know much about Objective-C, my vague understanding is that it's a bit more inspired by Smalltalk's view of object-oriented programming via message passing than what commonly is considered OO nowadays (which is reflected somewhat in that it doesn't use the typical dot-operator for method calls), and I'm guessing that it was included in Swift as one of the things that was liked about Objective-C (and maybe a little to make interop more direct).
While I wish every language had them in a way, they do tend to enshrine the argument names in the ABI, so now you can't change those in public APIs. (Main reason I think it shouldn't be part of the ABI is because I think only the necessary things to identify and correctly use a contract should be part of the ABI)
I have been thinking off if there is a way to have it work without enshrining them in the ABI and my only real idea is: allow arbitrary names at the call site (e.g. `my_function(some_var=1)` or `my_function(some_var: 1)`) but don't enforce the naming, just have linting spit out a warning for it if it doesn't match.
I don't feel like anyone finds it onerous to not be able to rename functions as a non-breaking change, so it's not obvious to me that this is much of a deal-breaker. If anything, I'd be thrilled for it to force people to spend more time carefully picking the names of their parameters in public APIs so that the autocompletion/documentation popup in my editor has higher quality information!
As someone else that went on rotten in my formative years, the feeling of disgust was so immense to know I want to stay away from any sort of real-life gore. Yet your experience is so common (fascination, wonder) I wonder what the hell is wrong with people to willingly watch corpses and dead people.
Still, despite my dislikes, I would fight against censorship of these sites. Somehow I feel a kid seeing a corpse or a video of people dying is less psychologically damaging than, for example, getting into political or religious extreme communities.
You are partly right but also prey to the same issue: yes, most technopositivists lack broad enough knowledge to even conceive that technology can be a net negative for society (usually a lack of foundation in humanities, a common issue in CS educated people)
Yet your comment has a naive dismissal of anarchism as ‘teenage politics’ which betray a lack of understanding the rich history and meaning behind anarchism, which is common these days. Dismissing it wholesale is like dismissing physics because you think string theory is silly.
reply