[Axiom-developer] Re: keyword arguments, was: Unions in Spad (Correction)

[Martin Rubey]

Stephen Wilson <address@hidden> writes:

> Perhaps the best solution in this case is as Bill Page suggested,
> implementing keyword arguments in Axiom, allowing us to write [a:1] or
> [b:1] thus enabling unambiguous specification of the branch.

Please (!) do it the aldor way, i.e., use == instead of :.  There is no reason
here to diverge from aldor syntax.

Furthermore, currently "fake" keyword arguments in SPAD are also done with
"==".  Look at my guessing package or the way options to the drawing routines
are passed.


I realize and accept that some of you are not interested in aldor at all.  But
for me and in fact, also for other people I know, but do not read this list,
aldor is a necessity.  I cannot do axiom as a hobby, it is work for me.  If
axiom and aldor diverge, I have a serious problem.

Martin