Re: feature req: passing sequences
- Posted by ghaberek (admin) Feb 14, 2015
- 1476 views
The point was that get_position() gives me data i cannot pass back to position(). It's as if i do not accept dollars for payment, but i give them back as change. Like Derek said, "get_position()" and "set_position()" also work better, so i'll just wrap position() for now. But this isn't the first time or the first keyword that has bitten me like this, and if the interpreter can recieve a sequence (like position(junk)) for any keyword, know junk is a list of the params, and pass it on as params, this can be cleared up in one fell swoop for all the keywords, both built-ins and user-written.
Kat
In this particular case, I think position(row, column) should be deprecated in favor of the more symmetrical set_position({row, column}). A "position" is always a sequence of {row,column} anyway, not two discrete values. As you put it, I don't think we should be "making change" between functions.
-Greg