On 14-Apr-06, at 11:15 AM, Joo ChurlSoo wrote:

> I think it is better that foo has rest parameter to consume the
> redundant
> arguments even if the rest parameter is not used in the definition
> of the
> procedure.
>
> Even though it has rest parameter, such a function is possible.
> And it
> seems to be a more clear syntax.

Unfortunately, if you add a rest parameter to foo (and bar) the error
checking is lost.  Good error checking is important in the case of
named parameters because you want to catch any misspelling of the
parameters.

Marc