Paul D. Fernhout wrote: >In the syntax case, I am continuing to point out that Smalltalk's keyword >syntax (e.g. "Point x: 10 y: 20" versus "Point(10, 20)" ) produces code >where all arguments are labeled and so it is easier to read and >understand. > That is, IMO, an arbitrary point of view, at best.
Touches a particular nerve with me because I went to great trouble in the design of PyGeo to *avoid* the use of keyword arguments, feeling it in fact important that in creating a construction one should be in geometry mindset mode, not programmming mindset mode, and therefore *not* have to be explicit in stating the obvious. See http://pygeo.sourceforge.net/docs/Overview.html#built-in-geometric-intelligence The point is not whether my design is right or wrong, but that I found myself to be using a tool that allowed me to express my design exactly as I wanted to - right or wrong. Would I have had the same right to be wrong using Smalltalk? Art _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
