[Moving reply to e-tangents.] > > I would not object to using keyword arguments for functions > > like that -- complex and cumbersome to use, and not used often. > > Well, than we pretty much agree 100% about keyword args.
+1. Except maybe for the "not used often". Depends on the "often" use. If used often without any keyword args (or optional args, for that matter), what difference does it make that the function _has_ keyword/optional args? By definition and convention, such args are generally not for the most common (the default) use case. But the general point, I think, is that keyword (and optional) args turn one function into a family of several, and that can be useful. But the "base" function, called without such args, can be just as convenient as if there were no such args possible.
