On Feb 18, 2008 1:17 PM, Arnaud Delobelle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A typical use of positional-only arguments is with a function > > def f(x, y=1, **kwargs): > ... > > where keyword arguments are potentially anything at all, including x > and y. For example: dict.update(). In fact it is a fairly > symmetrical itch to yours: without positional only arguments, the > above must be written something like:
I worry that dict is not just an example, it may be the *only* example. Does somebody have a use case that doesn't involve dict? Whereas keyword-only arguments force explicitness (at the cost of brevity), positional-only arguments do the opposite. The default already allows us to choose brevity when appropriate, and the only reason I see to force it is when there's a conflict with **kwargs. Such obscure features warrant an obscure yet well-named decorator, not an obscure syntax that's difficult to get help on. -- Adam Olsen, aka Rhamphoryncus _______________________________________________ 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
