in reply to Re: Your named arguments
in thread Your named arguments

There's more than one way to be friendly. :)
I don't balk at extra arguments either - this can be very useful, as wrappers can just call the function with whatever @_ they were called with.

The downside of allowing extra args is of course the classic misspelled_lable => 'uh-oh' problem. If such an error isn't caught right away, that can result in some very unfriendly bugs, depending. Do you perform any extra verification to defend against that class of problem?

Unchecked labels really get ugly if there are default values...

--
Marvin Humphrey
Rectangular Research ― http://www.rectangular.com

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Your named arguments
by adrianh (Chancellor) on Nov 09, 2005 at 12:08 UTC
    The downside of allowing extra args is of course the classic misspelled_lable => 'uh-oh' problem. If such an error isn't caught right away, that can result in some very unfriendly bugs, depending. Do you perform any extra verification to defend against that class of problem?

    One of the many reasons I love my test suite :-)