On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Yury Selivanov <yselivanov.ml at gmail.com> wrote: > On 2012-06-14, at 11:21 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Yury Selivanov >> <yselivanov.ml at gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 2012-06-14, at 7:16 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >>> >>>> POSITIONAL_ONLY >>>> POSITIONAL_OR_KEYWORD >>>> VAR_POSITIONAL >>>> KEYWORD_ONLY >>>> VAR_KEYWORD >>> >>> I like those. A bit too lengthy and verbose, but the names >>> are consistent. >> >> In this case, I'm willing to trade a bit of verbosity for accuracy. It >> also suggests a possible, more explicit name for the attribute: >> "binding". > > Can we keep it called 'kind'? > > While technically 'binding' is more precise description for this, it's > not as intuitive as 'kind'. Sure, I'm still OK with "kind". Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4