From: Louis J Scoras Date: 2005-10-25T06:28:57+09:00 Subject: Re: A comparison by example of keyword argument styles ------=_Part_1193_3121971.1130189335083 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline > What's wrong with making them all implicit instead of forcing me to add > this extra, ugly syntax? Well, my gut instinct was that this is breaking encapsulation: you didn't intend for that symbol to be in the public interface. But the more I think about it, how often do you changed the name of a parameter like this after the API is solidified? The parameter in that position can't change it's semantic meaning anyway. So you're probably right. It just feels wrong, as I'm sure being forced to explicitly define how arguments are specified feels wrong to you. -- Lou ------=_Part_1193_3121971.1130189335083--