I've had the same thought. Plus with contracts, can even be 3 times in proximity, e.g.
(define/contract (my-pony #:color [color "red"]) (() (#:color string?) . ->* . any) which is a bit like the Department of Redundancy Department's Division of Redundancy Division. :) Not a very big annoyance for me, but yes I've had similar observation. On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Laurent <laurent.ors...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > When using keyword arguments, I often write: > (define (foo #:some-arg some-arg) .... ) > or: > (define (foo #:some-arg [some-arg a-value]) .... ) > > This redundancy between the keyword name and the argument name bothers me a > little each time I use it. > > Would it be wrong to simplify this to: > (define (foo #:some-arg) > .... > (list some-arg) > ) > and > (define (foo [#:some-arg a-value]) > .... > (list some-arg) > ) > > where the `some-arg' definitions are automatically made out of the keyword > name? > Or maybe I'm just missing the point here. If so please enlighten me. > > Thanks, > Laurent > > _________________________________________________ > For list-related administrative tasks: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users > _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
