"Paul Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Austin Hastings said:
>
>> sub callmysub
>> {
>> mysub("Testing .. 1, 2, 3!"; key => 1024, align => Module::RIGHT);
>> }
>>
>> Which, upon reflection, apparently introduces an "implicit hashparsing"
>> context for autoquoting hashkeys.
>
> Those are p
Austin Hastings said:
> sub callmysub
> {
> mysub("Testing .. 1, 2, 3!"; key => 1024, align => Module::RIGHT);
> }
>
> Which, upon reflection, apparently introduces an "implicit hashparsing"
> context for autoquoting hashkeys.
Those are pairs, aren't they?
--
Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
> From: Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 12:44:39 +
> X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.12, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/
>
> So, I was, thinking about the way Common Lisp handles keyword
>
t hashparsing"
context for autoquoting hashkeys.
=Austin
--- Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, I was, thinking about the way Common Lisp handles keyword
> arguments. It's possible to declare a Lisp function as follows:
>
> (defun make-para ( content &key al
So, I was, thinking about the way Common Lisp handles keyword
arguments. It's possible to declare a Lisp function as follows:
(defun make-para ( content &key alignment font size color ) ...)
The point here is that the first argument is dealt with positionally,
and subsequent, opti
