In article <200311230648.41003.transami / runbox.com>,
  "T. Onoma" <transami / runbox.com> writes:

> I don't see how this is a big deal. When I first read this on Elliots post I 
> thought "so?" You can mispell things anywhere and its going to break stuff. 
> All you're pointing out is that no definite error is going to pop out and say 
> "hey dodo, you made a typo!".  Well, guess what? That kind of bug happens all 
> the time, especially in a dynamic language like Ruby. So I think that's a 
> very very small point, and thus doesn't invalidate less code argument. 
> Besides what do you do if no block is assigned?...more code.

I see.  You don't care typos.  But I care typos.

I decided the interface: symbol keyed hash with explicit option name
validation.  (The another idea in [ruby-core:1709])

It is a simplest way to do it.  I think other proposal's benefits
doesn't justify their code bloat and maintainability loss by their
complexity.

In future, I may reconsider the proposals if the simplest way cannot
fulfill requirements, but I don't take them now.
-- 
Tanaka Akira