Re: [TCLCORE] There is no justification for modifying [proc] for named parameters

On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Mathieu Lafon <mla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's why I'm currently requesting a vote, so that I can have a clear> position of TCT members on whether this can go into core or whether> this should be handled completely differently.

Though you already know my position (close to Colin's), I'll take this
opportunity to clarify the counter-proposal:

 - it clearly must be in C (thus reuse 99% of your impressive work)

 - it could either be proc-like (like Colin's FAproc) or a simpler
runtime handler ([eatargs $args] or even [eatargs] since [info level
0] introspection allows for it). My preference goes to the second
since it's simpler / less tentacular and works well with oo methods
and apply.

 - it would prefer, as a secondary goal, to have it as a bundled
extension like Thread and Tk rather than in the core, for a probation
period. Reason is twofold: (1) there's room for months of refinement
of the script-level API ; (2) its ubiquity might complicate
Tcl-to-other-lang translation. By "secondary goal" I mean I would
still vote YES (after reasonable arm twisting) if only the first two
goals were satisfied. Otherwise, as it stands, it is NO.

-Alex

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Tcl-Core mailing list
Tcl-...@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core