Alexander Plavin

Well, I see several solutions, for example: - Just carefully define what the function does: basically, say that `T(; kwargs...)` is equivalent to `T(; kwdef_default(T)..., kwargs...)`. Stuff like shortened show...

Fow now, I created https://github.com/JuliaAPlavin/KwdefHelpers.jl that extract kwdef default arguments even in complex scenarios: ```julia julia> @kwdef struct MyS{T} somefield = 123 another::Union{Int,Nothing} = nothing somemore lastone::Vector{T} = [1+2im, somemore,...

Tests still fail, but I cannot see any specific failure in the logs.

bump... not sure what to do here

Hmmm, some of these methods are tested directly in https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/c6c449ccdb75fbd72700704ae669e1f98e512206/stdlib/Dates/test/accessors.jl#L8-L46 Any idea whether it was intended as a public api (`yearmonthday(x)` and others taking any number) or not?

This would probably help the `replace` case (3 in the first post) where annotations are simply not implemented. But regarding cases 1, 2, 4, I'm not even sure I see...

The same behavior in the actual 1.11 release. At least some of these appear to be bugs and not just incomplete docstrings – correct me if I'm wrong. Eg, from...

I don't have a complete thought-out suggestion, but I imagined an perfect display to look like: ```julia julia> Base.AnnotatedString("good bad", [(1:4, :sentiment => +1), (6:8, :sentiment => -1), (3:6, :something...

Not too familar with 2/3 arg show() difference, what exactly would it mean for users? When they see it? My main concern is that the current default display doesn't indicate...

> the question is just how to best do so. The simplest way would just be to add any hint that annotations are present: ```julia julia> AnnotatedString("abc", [...]) AnnotatedString: "abc"...