[ruby-talk:8767] Re: Keyword arguments (was: Visions for 2001/1.7.x development?)

Nathaniel Talbott wrote:

> ...
> 
> Can anybody think of a good syntax for this? Does it make sense to have two
> distinct ways to def a method?
> 
> 
> Nathaniel

Yes.  It can make sense to have the parameters be a part of the method 
signature.  Yes, it can make sense to have distinct definitions for a 
method.  But please remember that these also add complexity to the 
interpreter.

Keyword arguments only make sense in the context where parameters 
already have a default value.
Distinct definitions seem to make less sense where the type of the 
parameter may not be known.

For my druthers, the distinct definitions would involve something like:

def gigo (String foo="", File bar = stdout)  # Is the specification of 
default values here now silly?
...
end

def gigo(foo=nil, bar)   #  But this doesn't specify all defaults, so 
perhaps the first one would rule?
...
end

def gigo(Integer foo=3, File bar=stdout)  #  This seems to add a lot of 
confusion.  What should it mean?
...
end

gigo(1)  # Must be the third method
gigo([1, 2,  3]) # Must be the second method
gigo("test")  # Must be the first method
gigo             #  Well, it has to be either the 1st or 3rd method, but 
how to decide?
gigo (bar = fazzbaz)  # assuming that fazzbaz is a file, this could be 
any or them.

Now if gigo were to be replaced by, say, echo, then what is meant would 
be obvious in each case (and bar in the second had best be expected to 
be some sort of writable text stream)