: sub foo($x, [EMAIL PROTECTED], +$k) {...} # (2) OK
Fine, you can set @a using positional notation, like push(), in addition to the notations available to (1). But if you set "k =>", it has to be before the list, unless you pass the list explicitly as a "*@" named parameter. With the exception of [EMAIL PROTECTED] at the front as in (2), non-positional parameters don't pay any attention to their order of declaration.
It's the "with the exception of [EMAIL PROTECTED] at the front" part that worries me quite a bit. I'd be a lot happier with having the rule be "non-positional parameters must come after positional parameters, but before any variadic elements".
I think newbies are going to unquestionably try and put the parameters in the same order as they expect to see the eventual arguments, and be durn confused it doesn't work -- I know I would. Especially because:
sub foo($x, +$k, *%h) {...} # (3)
sub foo($x, *%h, +$k) {...} # (4)_are_ synonymous, but
sub foo($x, +$k, [EMAIL PROTECTED]) {...} # (1)
sub foo($x, [EMAIL PROTECTED], +$k) {...} # (2)are quite definitely not.
Dunno. I'm just one datapoint, but I strongly see the difference between (1) and (2) as being a *huge* newbie trap. And it doesn't seem like you ever gain anything by specifying (1) -- I don't know why you would ever purposefully _want_ to do that, instead of (2). So I would still strongly urge that (1) and (2) be synonyms.
MikeL
