Hmm - the interaction of "a=b" style args & *-ed args is a bit counter-intuitive, particularly as the "a=b" args syntatically have to come before the *-ed args:

...

...

...

def f(a,b,c,d): ... return a,b,c,d ... f(1,c=3,*(2,4)) Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in ? TypeError: keyword parameter 'c' redefined in call to f() f(1,b=3,*(2,4)) Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in ? TypeError: keyword parameter 'b' redefined in call to f() f(1,d=4,*(2,3)) (1, 2, 3, 4)

I humbly submit that This Is Wrong. I haven't seen anybody complain about it, which suggests to me that noone is using this combination, and I propose either:

1) banning it 2) demanding that the *-ed arg precede the "a=b" args

Interesting. The *-ed arg cannot precede the a=b args currently, but I agree that it would have made more sense to do it that way. I'm not sure that it's worth allowing the combination of kw args and *tuple, but I'l also not sure that it *isn't* worth it.

Of course, if noone is using this "feature", then maybe this dusty little corner of the language should be left undisturbed.

I think it may be best to leave it alone.

And I haven't even thought about default arguments yet...

That's unrelated. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

Hmm - the interaction of "a=b" style args & *-ed args is a bit counter-intuitive, particularly as the "a=b" args syntatically have to come before the *-ed args:

...

...

...

def f(a,b,c,d): ... return a,b,c,d ... f(1,c=3,*(2,4)) Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in ? TypeError: keyword parameter 'c' redefined in call to f() f(1,b=3,*(2,4)) Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in ? TypeError: keyword parameter 'b' redefined in call to f() f(1,d=4,*(2,3)) (1, 2, 3, 4)

I humbly submit that This Is Wrong. I haven't seen anybody complain about it, which suggests to me that noone is using this combination, and I propose either:

1) banning it 2) demanding that the *-ed arg precede the "a=b" args

Interesting. The *-ed arg cannot precede the a=b args currently, but I agree that it would have made more sense to do it that way. I'm not sure that it's worth allowing the combination of kw args and *tuple, but I'l also not sure that it *isn't* worth it.

Of course, if noone is using this "feature", then maybe this dusty little corner of the language should be left undisturbed.

I think it may be best to leave it alone.

And I haven't even thought about default arguments yet...

That's unrelated. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)