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
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
