Guido van Rossum wrote: > On 4/17/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The rest of it was just suggesting that permitting keyword >> parameters/arguments after *args should be the *only* change we make in this >> area. I don't see any point in permitting positional arguments to come after >> a >> keyword argument, even at the call site (this ability was a side effect of >> Talin's suggested implementation strategy). > > Right. In the call foo(1, 2, abc=42, 3), what's the sequential > parameter position for the 3? I think it's ambiguous in the sense that > reasonable users could disagree what would be the best choice. > > But in foo(1, 2, *args, 3, 4) there's no harm; nor is there harm in > foo(1, 2, *args, abc=42, **kwds). I'm on the fence about foo(*args, > **kwds, abc=42).
BTW, do we want to allow foo(1, *args1, 2, *args2, 3)? And what about foo(bar=17, **kwargs1, baz=23, **kwargs2)? Servus, Walter _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com