Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.python > #35653 > unrolled thread

Re: Function Parameters

Started byOscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com>
First post2012-12-27 21:07 +0000
Last post2012-12-27 21:07 +0000
Articles 1 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: Function Parameters Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com> - 2012-12-27 21:07 +0000

#35653 — Re: Function Parameters

FromOscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com>
Date2012-12-27 21:07 +0000
SubjectRe: Function Parameters
Message-ID<mailman.1369.1356642448.29569.python-list@python.org>
On 27 December 2012 20:47, Joseph L. Casale <jcasale@activenetwerx.com> wrote:
>> Don't use kwargs for this.  List out the arguments in the function
>> spec and give the optional ones reasonable defaults.
>
>> I only use kwargs myself when the set of possible arguments is dynamic
>> or unknown.
>
> Gotch ya, but when the inputs to some keywords are similar, if the function is called
> with two of three (which is valid) and the arg name isn't used, the assignment is order
> dependent and arbitrary in a sense and I can not distinguish.
>
> It would be nice if you could force the keyword to be mandatory to forgo the assumption
> in assignment like kwargs provides with gets. I suppose all the time wasted here is in vain
> as the caller could blunder elsewhere...

In Python 3 you can do this using keyword-only arguments like so (note
the asterisk that separates keyword arguments from positional
arguments):

def my_func(self, *, some_key=MISSING, another_key=MISSING):


Oscar

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python


csiph-web