From: gga <ggarra@...>
Date: 2005-10-23T12:37:00+09:00
Subject: Re: A comparison by example of keyword argument styles

> Could you elaborate why you prefer the other syntax?  I can give you my
> reasons for strongly suggesting following python's syntax, instead of
> what you proposed.

Never mind me.  I read David Black's response and I see the point.

Still, if the positional / named argument definition is chosen, could I
also suggest that a symbol (or keyword) is used to delimit positional
vs. named arguments, without having to specify it on each variable?

That is, instead of:

     def function( a, b, c, d:, e: = 1, f: )
     end

Something along the lines of:

   def function( a, b, c : d, e = 1, f )
   end

where parameters to the left of the colon (or whatever symbol/keyword
you choose) are positional parameters and those to the right are named
ones.  A more readable symbol for this would be "!" or "|" but
obviously these conflict with ruby's use of those for negation/or.
This would somewhat help solve the issue of the definition being so
easily confused with symbols, make the function more readable (imo) and
would lead to less typing, too.  If your model is CLISP, this is also
how CLISP deals with this (using &key), like:

    (defun foo ( &key a b c )  (list a b c))

Thanks... sorry for my 3 emails.