Talk:Named parameters: Difference between revisions

(→‎Duplication?: expressing concern over overly narrow tasks)
Line 6:
:Also note that the Tcl example in the [[Optional parameters]] task is wrong; there's another mechanism (optional positional parameters) that should be demonstrated there instead. I'll have to correct that. Bother… —[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 07:56, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
::When I wrote [[Optional parameters]] it was my intent that positional optional parameters were included in it; the text even says so. It was designed to be accomplished in many different ways (as opposed to, say, this task, which specifies the particular concept of named parameters).<br>I am concerned that the idea you mention of "decomposition" of features leads to many tasks which demonstrate single language features/properties, and entirely leave out languages which simply do not have those features -- and the whole point of RC is ''comparative'' programming, so this is undesirable; we should aim to have tasks which many languages can implement, ''using their own particular facilities''. --[[User:Kevin Reid|Kevin Reid]] 13:39, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
:::So Kevin, would a task of "Function definition/Function call semantics and examples" be too wide a task? You might have noticed that after my initial question above, I thought it might be best to write something that might cover all such tasks and linked the Python entries of the other two to this one. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 13:55, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Anonymous user