On 29/12/05, Austin Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, is there a conceptual connection between imposing named argument > interpretation on pairs in an arg list and slurping up the end of a > parameter list? Are there other meanings of prefix:<*> that relate to > one or the other of these two meanings?
The missing link is that prefix:<*> in an argument list also causes things like arrays to be treated as a sequence of separate parameters, rather than as a single array parameter. See "Flattening argument lists" in S06. (This was the original meaning of prefix:<*> in arglists; the named-pair behaviour was added later, when pair values ceased to have named behaviour automatically.) Stuart
