On 26/10/2011 21:13, Lars Hellström wrote:
>> I'd argue, though, that it is useless. If you want named parameters,
>> key-value input is much more powerful.
> A lot of the time: yes; and I can certainly live with numbered
> parameters. It does however become a bit awkward when you add another
> optional argument to an xparse-defined command that already has a lot of
> arguments, since you will then find yourself having to renumber most #n
> in the replacement text. Trivially doable, but something of a
> maintenance problem.
Hence the general feeling that we should probably not use too many
optional arguments, in the main