Re: keyword-arguments (was Re: Lambdas (was Re: [RFC] ... New Python Syntax))

Tim Peters (
Fri, 27 May 94 16:55:01 -0400

> > [tim]
> > ... the recent keyword-argument extension to Python can be abused

> [don]
> keyword-argument extention?

My mistake: I meant default-argument.

> Did I miss something?

Probably <wink>: a while back Guido did note to the list that he was
leaving the door open for keyword arguments.

> [example of what keyword-arguments mean]

Stroustrup's new book on the evolution of C++ contains a discussion of
why keyword arguments were rejected for C++, despite initial general
enthusiasm for the idea. Interesing debate! Give it a read before I
recycle the arguments as if they were mine <grin>.

> ....
> B.T.W. I have completed and will soon be posting a patch that allows
> the use of optionally required end statements. ... I am starting to
> get the feeling that nobody even cares anymore ...

Seems more the case that the proponents can't agree on what's wanted!
You and Marc were off to a fine start about two weeks ago, but it fizzled
out. I may not want this stuff, but I'm glad you're still thinking about

even-if-"optionally-required"-is-a-bit-paradoxical<grin>-ly y'rs - tim

Tim Peters
not speaking for Kendall Square Research Corp