note how to do parameter checking

Author: rocky

docs/extending/developing-code/extending/case-studies/selecting-builtin.rst

@@ -30,12 +30,9 @@ In a cloned git directory, you can find some of missing using ``git grep -n '^#
 Below, we have a few examples of some actual Mathics3 Builtins that we have added. Hopefully you can use this as an aid for filling in one of the many Builtin Functions, such as one of the above.
 
 
-.. toctree::
-   :maxdepth: 1
-
-   Undefined/index
-   KroneckerProduct/index
-   Curl/index
+*  :ref: `Undefined`
+*  :ref: `KroneckerProduct`
+*  :ref: `Curl`
 
 
 As we added these Builtins, we recorded the steps that were taken. We ordered the list above to go from the simple to more advanced.

docs/extending/developing-code/extending/tutorial.rst

@@ -13,12 +13,13 @@ After reading this you may want to go through the detailed examples in :ref:`Cas
 
    tutorial/0-predefined
    tutorial/1-builtin
-   tutorial/2-help-markup
-   tutorial/3-test-markup
-   tutorial/4-patterns
-   tutorial/5-rules
-   tutorial/6-attributes
-   tutorial/7-warnings
+   tutorial/2-parameter-checking
+   tutorial/3-help-markup
+   tutorial/4-test-markup
+   tutorial/5-patterns
+   tutorial/6-rules
+   tutorial/7-attributes
+   tutorial/8-warnings
 
 .. TODO: Document Operator and SympyFunction
 .. TODO: Document interrupts

docs/extending/developing-code/extending/tutorial/1-builtin.rst

@@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ The docstring for the ``eval`` method is a Mathics3 pattern:
 
       "Hello[person_String]"
 
-Inside Mathic3 you can test what this matches using the Mathics3 ``MatchQ[]`` function:
+Inside Mathics3, you can test what this matches using the Mathics3 ``MatchQ[]`` function:
 
 .. code-block:: mathematica
 

docs/extending/developing-code/extending/tutorial/2-parameter-checking.rst

@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+Checking Parameter Counts
+-------------------------
+
+.. index:: parameter count checking
+
+In a programming language that allows for generic and extensible
+arguments, what should we do when a function parameter list does not
+match any of the patterns of a particular builtin function specification?
+
+In WMA and systems with rewrite rules, often what is done is the
+expression is returned unchanged. This allows users to write rewrite rules
+involving patterns that are not covered by your code.
+
+For example:
+
+.. code-block:: mathematica
+
+    In[1]:= Hello[] = "Hi, Rocky!";
+
+    In[2]= Hello[]
+    Out[2]= "Hi, Rocky!"
+
+Above, in essence we've added form of *Hello* that does not need a parameter.
+Instead, it provides a default value when none is given.
+
+Pretty convenient and slick huh? Yes, but it can also lead to
+confusion in trying to find out where a problem is coming from since
+the definition can be spread to from many sources of definitions and
+rewrite rules which might be mentioned  or part of other definitions:
+
+.. code-block:: mathematica
+
+    In[3]:= Rocky[Hello[]] = "Hi again, Rocky";
+
+    In[3]= Rocky[Hello[]]
+    Out[3]= "Hi again, Rocky"
+
+Notice that the *In[3]* assignment takes place before the *In[1]*
+assignment.  Here, these rewrite rules are in close proximity, but
+they could be spread out over time or over different files.
+
+To help you figure how what evaluation is rewriting, see *TraceEvaluation*.
+
+Many times though, at least for me and other simple-minded users, when
+I type a builtin-function with the wrong number of parameters, it is
+helpful to get an error message rather than the expression unchanged.
+
+Generally, I do not expecting (or hope not to expect) some other clever rewrite rule,
+doing strange things.
+
+So, it is sometimes helpful when writing a builtin function,
+to specify the number of parameters that are allowed, and give a standard
+message when the parameter counts do not match. This can be done setting class variables
+``eval_error`` and ``expected_args`` of a builtin function derived from ``Builtin``.
+
+Here is an example:
+
+.. code-block:: python
+
+  class Hello(Builtin):
+
+        # Set checking that the number of arguments required to exactly one.
+        eval_error = Builtin.generic_argument_error
+        expected_args = 1
+
+
+Now when I call *Hello* without any arguments you will see::
+
+    In[4]:= Hello[]
+    Hello::argx: Hello called with 0 arguments; 1 argument is expected.
+
+The value of ``expected_args`` does not have to be an integer. It can be a range, like:
+
+* ``range(5)`` one to four arguments
+* ``range(2,4)``:  two or three arguments
+
+or a set:
+
+* ``{1, 3, 5}`` one, three, or five arguments