Talin writes:
> So in other words, nothing has really changed - most people seem to
> like the idea of keyword-only arguments, but find the 'required
> keyword arguments' syntax confusing. (I haven't found many people
> who were in favor of it, however Guido says that's the form that he
> pref
On 5/23/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, c.l.p was strangely quiet in response to my posting PEP 3102 a few
> days ago. Only two comments, one of a general "ick" variety that seems
> mainly based on personal bias, and another which likes the idea but
> votes a -1 on the 'naked star' syn
Talin writes:
> So in other words, nothing has really changed - most people seem to
> like the idea of keyword-only arguments, but find the 'required
> keyword arguments' syntax confusing. (I haven't found many people
> who were in favor of it, however Guido says that's the form that he
> p
On 5/23/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, c.l.p was strangely quiet in response to my posting PEP 3102 a few
> days ago. Only two comments, one of a general "ick" variety that seems
> mainly based on personal bias, and another which likes the idea but
> votes a -1 on the 'naked star' syn
Well, c.l.p was strangely quiet in response to my posting PEP 3102 a few
days ago. Only two comments, one of a general "ick" variety that seems
mainly based on personal bias, and another which likes the idea but
votes a -1 on the 'naked star' syntax.
So in other words, nothing has really change
