Re: keyword arguments?

Hi Daniel, named paramters should only be followed by named paramters - like with default values. So one can first "fill" the unnamed once and then some (or all) of the named once. But remembering the last discussion on this idea I don't think this will be added... johannes Daniel Crookston wrote: > Actually, that would be acceptable, since you lose the bulk of array(). > The only thing that remains a problem is that if you add another > (non-named) parameter, you still need to worry about the relative > positions in all of your functions. Now that I think about it, that's > actually a bigger complaint for me than having to use array(). > > Thoughts? Comments? Flames? > > Daniel > > P.S. Thank you for the link to the patches :) > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> I'm still in favor of an approach we are using here where you can pass >> associative arrays without array(): > > <snip all else>