Jim Jewett wrote: > On 4/20/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Some legal combinations: >> >> f(1, 2, 3, d=1) # Positional args a, b and c >> f(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, d=1) # Positional args a, b and c and (4, 5, 6) as >> args >> f(2, a=1, d=1) # Provide a as a keyword arg instead > > So positional would still have to occur before keywords, but only if > they were passed as positional? Today, that third one gets a > TypeError for assigning multiple values to a.
My mistake - I thought that was currently legal, and didn't check it. So no, I'd keep the current rule - once you pass one positional argument as a keyword, you have to do the same for all subsequent positional arguments. Which implies that "positional-only" arguments would have to come *before* the current normal arguments that can be passed either way. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia --------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.boredomandlaziness.org _______________________________________________ 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