On 11/22/2013 06:25 PM, August Oktobar wrote:
What about multiple return values (e.g. in Golang)?
... In effect making function results out variables.
With that you also could vote for deamons (the previous value of the
variable to be set by a function can be seen within a function, in
On 11/22/2013 06:52 PM, Ivanko B wrote:
How looks the call of the function?
==
Smth like in Python:
(var1,var2):= MultResFunc(arg1,arg2);
In Python, the (var1,var2) syntax has other effects on it's own, as well
IIRC, in a language I used some 100 years ago (called PLZ
On 11/25/2013 09:36 AM, Michael Schnell wrote:
With that you also could vote for deamons (the previous value of the
variable to be set by a function can be seen within a function, in
effect making function results var variables.
Sorry, this was incorrect.
Daemons in this context are
On 11/24/2013 08:44 AM, Martin Schreiber wrote:
On Saturday 23 November 2013 21:23:11 Ivanko B wrote:
:= 'The string result: '+avalue;
=
:= instead of exposing Result ? Looks interesting.
It is mandatory and allowed as last statement only.
I also think this is a nice idea.
On 11/24/2013 02:48 PM, Marcos Douglas wrote:
But if 'return' exists, why I will use ':= value'??? Two ways to do
the same?
...like in C ?
return lvalue;
might be a synonym for
:= lrvalue;
return;
-Michael
--
Shape
.. or
:= lrvalue;
exit;
-Michael
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers strategic insight and
On 11/24/2013 05:21 PM, Marcos Douglas wrote:
I disagree that a program without 'return' or 'exit' uses a more safe
coding style.
+1;
you often would need to use break and/or clumsy constructs using flags
or even goto.
IMHO, each of this makes the code less readable.
-Michael
On 11/24/2013 05:41 PM, Ivanko B wrote:
Also how about BREAK(nesting_level) NEXT(nesting_level) ? Some
languages provide that and one is quite handy.
Nesting levels are just horrible, as you will regularly forget to
change them appropriately when you add a new nesting level to your code.
On Monday 25 November 2013 10:24:40 Michael Schnell wrote:
On 11/24/2013 05:21 PM, Marcos Douglas wrote:
I disagree that a program without 'return' or 'exit' uses a more safe
coding style.
+1;
you often would need to use break and/or clumsy constructs using flags
or even goto.
IMHO,
On 11/25/2013 10:43 AM, Martin Schreiber wrote:
You and Marcos probably never had to debug code with common necessary
cleanup at procedure end and a deeply nested sometimes triggered
'exit' which bypassed the cleanup accidentally. It happened several
times to me...
I do see the argument
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 7:12 AM, Michael Schnell mschn...@lumino.de wrote:
On 11/25/2013 10:43 AM, Martin Schreiber wrote:
You and Marcos probably never had to debug code with common necessary
cleanup at procedure end and a deeply nested sometimes triggered
'exit' which bypassed the cleanup
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 3:58 AM, Ivanko B ivankob4m...@gmail.com wrote:
Result is also an (undeclared) ghost :)
But you can SEE it!
Let's cut the E: Exception too, because E variable do not
exists... what is happend here blablabla...
--
Marcos Douglas
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 4:07 AM, Ivanko B ivankob4m...@gmail.com wrote:
A ghost is receiving a value? :-/
=
Also interesting to multiple values return w/o intermedialte (local)
variables:
//(a,b,c,d,e,f,g) :these would be intermediate variables
,:= 1,,,:= var1*3 // b:= ,
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 5:46 AM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday 23 November 2013 18:55:00 Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 08:32:57 Martin Schreiber wrote:
...
sub
:= result;
=
Will it cause extra memory copying if function returns a class instance etc ?
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of
On Sunday 24 November 2013 14:48:05 Marcos Douglas wrote:
You can not protect the programmers using this. Think. Even if you use
'return', 'result', whatever... if the programmer put a Exit on your
code the same error will happen! Bad programmers do it. They forget to
create some object, don't
On Sunday 24 November 2013 14:55:03 Ivanko B wrote:
:= result;
=
Will it cause extra memory copying if function returns a class instance etc
?
A class instance is a pointer - not expensive to copy?
It could be optimized to use the assignment destination address directly
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday 24 November 2013 14:48:05 Marcos Douglas wrote:
You can not protect the programmers using this. Think. Even if you use
'return', 'result', whatever... if the programmer put a Exit on your
code the same error
How about EXIT;=GOTO END; to avoid special labeling directly
before body's END ?
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R)
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Ivanko B ivankob4m...@gmail.com wrote:
Also how about BREAK(nesting_level) NEXT(nesting_level) ? Some
languages provide that and one is quite handy.
+1
--
Marcos Douglas
--
Shape the
On Sunday 24 November 2013 17:37:53 Ivanko B wrote:
How about EXIT;=GOTO END; to avoid special labeling directly
before body's END ?
'exit' *is* 'goto end'. I think there *should* be a label in order to
show attention, there is an 'exit' somewhere!
Martin
On Sunday 24 November 2013 17:41:11 Ivanko B wrote:
Also how about BREAK(nesting_level) NEXT(nesting_level) ? Some
languages provide that and one is quite handy.
Same as with 'exit'/'return', better to use a 'goto' with a label in order to
show by the destination label attention, there is a
On Thursday 21 November 2013 08:32:57 Martin Schreiber wrote:
I do not like much the terminating 'return' statement, but
sub strfunc(): msestring;
var
result: msestring;
begin
result:= 'The string result:'
if 1 2 then
result:= result + 'mumu';
else
result:= result + 'koko';
On Friday 22 November 2013 19:19:10 August Oktobar wrote:
What about returning by var?
function f(t: T):var T; or function f(t: T):out T; or function f(t:
T):T;var;
in delphi you must return record by pointer or var/out parameter to avoid
copying
With the proposed assignment at end of the
On Thursday 21 November 2013 22:51:48 Sieghard wrote:
Hallo Martin,
Du schriebst am Thu, 21 Nov 2013 07:25:17 +0100:
Just a question: could you give some symbolic syntax representation?
..
Later when it has been settled down. I don't like to be pinned down or
impeached in this early
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 08:32:57 Martin Schreiber wrote:
...
sub strfunc2(const avalue: msestring,para: boolean): msestring;
begin
if para then
return 'The not string result';
end;
:= 'The string
:= 'The string result: '+avalue;
=
:= instead of exposing Result ? Looks interesting.
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech
:= instead of exposing Result ?
=\
And ALSO replaces return. Hmm... Even more interesting :)
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Ivanko B ivankob4m...@gmail.com wrote:
:= instead of exposing Result ?
=\
And ALSO replaces return. Hmm... Even more interesting :)
Oh my... WTF is that?!
A ghost is receiving a value? :-/
I think is better to turn back to 'Result' variable or
Result is also an (undeclared) ghost :)
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers strategic insight
On Sunday 24 November 2013 07:07:43 Ivanko B wrote:
A ghost is receiving a value? :-/
=
Also interesting to multiple values return w/o intermedialte (local)
variables:
//(a,b,c,d,e,f,g) :these would be intermediate variables
,:= 1,,,:= var1*3 // b:= , f:=
I think in order
On Saturday 23 November 2013 21:23:11 Ivanko B wrote:
:= 'The string result: '+avalue;
=
:= instead of exposing Result ? Looks interesting.
It is mandatory and allowed as last statement only.
Martin
On Saturday 23 November 2013 18:55:00 Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 08:32:57 Martin Schreiber wrote:
...
sub strfunc2(const avalue: msestring,para: boolean): msestring;
begin
if para
On 11/21/2013 05:41 PM, Ivanko B wrote:
end:= result;
==
It means one more memory copying opetation which can be quite
expensive in case of large data (dynarrays,..).
Why does everybody suspect that Martin is a bad compiler designer that
is unable to do decent
On 11/21/2013 08:24 PM, Ivanko B wrote:
The 'sub' keyword is just ugly, not an error. ;-)
=
Feels less ugly than function for non-returning procedure for returning
:)
IMHO. If inventing a new keyword replacing as well function as procedure
it should be Method as same
On 11/21/2013 10:50 PM, Sieghard wrote:
Hallo Michael,
Du schriebst am Thu, 21 Nov 2013 10:10:29 +0100:
Using a procedure name without () can be either a call to this
procedure or denote the address of this procedure to be moved onto a
procedure variable.
It will be what was defined for it
What about multiple return values (e.g. in Golang)?
something like this:
function Something(a,b:integer):integer, string;
begin
...
exit(1,'abc');
end;
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 7:39 AM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.comwrote:
On Friday 22 November 2013 06:07:37 Ivanko B wrote:
Also, we
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 2:25 PM, August Oktobar augustokto...@gmail.com wrote:
What about multiple return values (e.g. in Golang)?
something like this:
function Something(a,b:integer):integer, string;
begin
...
exit(1,'abc');
end;
+1 !
But like this:
function
function Something(a,b:integer):integer, string;
Like an [single-row] array of values of diferent type ? Excellent
highly demanded !
(it may allow to avoid exessive ugly using var subroutine params )
Mixing atomic, refcounted object types in same return is appreciated too.
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R) Software
On Friday 22 November 2013 18:25:46 August Oktobar wrote:
What about multiple return values (e.g. in Golang)?
something like this:
function Something(a,b:integer):integer, string;
begin
...
exit(1,'abc');
end;
How looks the call of the function?
Martin
How looks the call of the function?
==
Smth like in Python:
(var1,var2):= MultResFunc(arg1,arg2);
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront
or even :
var1^,var2,@var3:= ..
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers strategic insight and
var
s:string;
i:integer;
s, i := Something(1, 2);
or
_, s := Something(1, 2);
or
i, _ := Something(1, 2);
or some other keyword (nil?)
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.comwrote:
On Friday 22 November 2013 18:25:46 August Oktobar wrote:
What about multiple
On Friday 22 November 2013 18:52:32 Ivanko B wrote:
How looks the call of the function?
==
Smth like in Python:
(var1,var2):= MultResFunc(arg1,arg2);
I think the main reason for functions are expressions and subroutine
parameters. Use a record (- object in MSElang) in
What about returning by var?
function f(t: T):var T; or function f(t: T):out T; or function f(t:
T):T;var;
in delphi you must return record by pointer or var/out parameter to avoid
copying
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.comwrote:
On Friday 22 November 2013
Many funcs should return bool success/failure flag and result value
for sucess (and undefined for failure). Mutiple return would excellet
for this purpose:
ret_code, func_result:= superpuperfunc(..);
if ret_code then func_result:= ...;
With the VAR approch it looks ugly :
if
On Friday 22 November 2013 19:19:10 August Oktobar wrote:
What about returning by var?
function f(t: T):var T; or function f(t: T):out T; or function f(t:
T):T;var;
in delphi you must return record by pointer or var/out parameter to avoid
copying
Are you sure? AFAIK 'result' is a hidden
Hallo Michael,
Du schriebst am Fri, 22 Nov 2013 09:28:41 +0100:
(With fpc you need to add @ for the second, which I think is extremely
ugly.)
But it is thoroughly consistent with the use of @ with variables,
where it returns their address as well.
This makes the C approach (above) look
Hallo Martin,
Du schriebst am Fri, 22 Nov 2013 07:49:51 +0100:
On Friday 22 November 2013 07:32:17 Martin Schreiber wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 22:23:22 Sieghard wrote:
THen, what about using the function name as a pseudo variable to pass
out the resukt value?
(Oops -
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Sieghard s_c_...@arcor.de wrote:
Hallo Martin,
Du schriebst am Fri, 22 Nov 2013 07:49:51 +0100:
On Friday 22 November 2013 07:32:17 Martin Schreiber wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 22:23:22 Sieghard wrote:
THen, what about using the function name as a
On Thursday 21 November 2013 08:49:10 Ivanko B wrote:
It's also possible to define subroutines without keywords at all:
-
Has the advantage that the name is left-aligned (see attachment).
Martin
attachment: nosub.pngattachment:
On 11/21/2013 07:31 AM, Martin Schreiber wrote:
As usual I still don't understand.
procedure strfunc(): msestring;
begin
return 'The string result';
end;
Slight Advantage of Result:
procedure strfunc(x: Boolean): msestring;
begin
Result := 'The string result';
if x then
On 11/20/2013 11:04 PM, Marcos Douglas wrote:
No, no, no...please! :( I know that you want to make a language more
ortogonal but exceptions could exist! If you do not have parameters,
why I need use this '()'?
This introdices is a well known ambiguity in Delphi, that in fpc is
resolved (when
On Thursday 21 November 2013 10:03:14 Michael Schnell wrote:
Slight Advantage of Result:
procedure strfunc(x: Boolean): msestring;
begin
Result := 'The string result';
if x then
Result := 'Not The string result';
Result := '' + Result + ''
end;
Here you don't need
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 3:21 AM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday 20 November 2013 23:01:52 Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi,
'()' for procedure header and procedure calling is mandatory.
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 3:46 AM, Ivanko B ivankob4m...@gmail.com wrote:
Oberon uses 'procedure' too.
===
Then better sub[routine] which means both function procedure :)
Worse, sorry.
--
Marcos Douglas
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 4:31 AM, Ivanko B ivankob4m...@gmail.com wrote:
Sub since it's shorter :)
So, use func that is short too, but have better name, IMHO.
And how about removing var begin in subroutibe defenitions ? Smth like :
---
sub test1(cosnt arg1: integer): bolean
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 4:32 AM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 07:56:12 Ivanko B wrote:
Unneeded extra variables incl stack ones stuff lines, smth like :
procedure strfunc(): msestring;
begin
result:= 'The string result:'
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 6:17 AM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 10:03:14 Michael Schnell wrote:
Slight Advantage of Result:
procedure strfunc(x: Boolean): msestring;
begin
Result := 'The string result';
if x then
Result := 'Not The
For me is ugly to see a procedure call like Foo()
=
For instance, TCL solves this problem by enclosing subroutine calls in
square braces :
proc get_res {param1 param2} {
return [expr $param1 * $param2]
}
set res [get_res 3 4]
And assigning from other
Has the advantage that the name is left-aligned (see attachment).
But seems unapproppriate for defining netsted subroutines ( looks like
calling them ).
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free
PERL goes even furher - all variables are prefixed by $ on both
sides of assigment, so $ sign distinguishes variables and
subroutines so the latter don't need additional marking anymore :)
--
Shape the Mobile Experience:
On Friday 22 November 2013 06:07:37 Ivanko B wrote:
Also, we don't know what ( var or out ) is current state result.
What will locally defined result variable (to assign from in
end:=) be ? What's the difference between these result-s ?
One can read Delphi 'result' and forget to set it.
On Friday 22 November 2013 07:32:17 Martin Schreiber wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 22:23:22 Sieghard wrote:
THen, what about using the function name as a pseudo variable to pass out
the resukt value?
(Oops - that's exactly what original Pascal did...)
Actually the exotic proposal
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Ivanko B ivankob4m...@gmail.com wrote:
PERL goes even furher - all variables are prefixed by $ on both
sides of assigment, so $ sign distinguishes variables and
subroutines so the latter don't need additional marking anymore :)
We need to think why people will
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 13:49:46 Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 12:46:55 Marcos Douglas wrote:
Please tell me you
On Thursday 21 November 2013 17:03:16 Marcos Douglas wrote:
Please, don't do that... the sintaxe end:= result; is very ugly!
Alternatives?
Using implicit 'result' variable or 'FUNCTIONNAME' variable is bad because of
the unclear input/output state, a mandatory 'return' statement before 'end;'
On Thursday 21 November 2013 13:49:46 Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 12:46:55 Marcos Douglas wrote:
Please tell me you have not chosen the keyword sub for
procedures/functions. :(
Why not?
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 16:36:38 Ivanko B wrote:
But it may be weird to prepare function code to this final asiigmnent :)
Example?
Examle of successful realization of a regular (not 2*2) function with
such
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 17:03:16 Marcos Douglas wrote:
Please, don't do that... the sintaxe end:= result; is very ugly!
Alternatives?
Using implicit 'result' variable or 'FUNCTIONNAME' variable is bad because of
Hallo Marcos,
Du schriebst am Thu, 21 Nov 2013 10:23:28 -0200:
We need to think why people will use MSElang instead of other language.
If we will use specifically things of others languages, is better to
use the real language, don't you think? ;-)
If this will go on some further, no further
Hallo Martin,
Du schriebst am Thu, 21 Nov 2013 07:25:17 +0100:
Just a question: could you give some symbolic syntax representation?
..
Later when it has been settled down. I don't like to be pinned down or
impeached in this early stage. ;-)
You'll probabely regret it. Ok, your choice.
--
On Thursday 21 November 2013 18:39:09 Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com
wrote:
Why needs a 'return' statement only before 'end'?
Not only, before end must be a return statement otherwise the return value is
undefined.
Using 'return'
Hallo Marcos,
Du schriebst am Thu, 21 Nov 2013 10:49:46 -0200:
Who defined that a function HAVE to return a value ALWAYS? Where is
this rule? ;-)
Mathematics.
--
--
(Weitergabe von Adressdaten, Telefonnummern u.ä. ohne Zustimmung
nicht gestattet, ebenso Zusendung von Werbung oder
On Thursday 21 November 2013 16:55:12 Ivanko B wrote:
A working example of using RESULT varaiable :
--
function monthsstate(aperiodity: msestring): booleanarty;
begin
setlength(result,12);
if system.pos('Ja',aperiodity) 0 then result[0]:=true else
result[0]:=false; if
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 13:48:37 Marcos Douglas wrote:
WOW! Exotic too much and worse then use result variable.
Why? It shows clearly that it is a write only variable which can not be
read and can't be
Hallo Martin,
Du schriebst am Thu, 21 Nov 2013 08:32:57 +0100:
procedure strfunc(): msestring;
...
result:= result + 'koko';
I do not like the not clear definition of 'result', is it a 'var' or
'out' variable? What happens here:
It could be considered an automatic local variable of
This new world seems to be a forgotten old one - sub[routine] :)
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R) Software Adrenaline
and work as before?
==
[..]
end:= sqrt(result*10)%i1+pow(3,j) too ?
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R)
But it may be weird to prepare function code to this final asiigmnent :)
Example?
Examle of successful realization of a regular (not 2*2) function with
such return ? Me can't event imagine how :)
--
Shape the Mobile
On Thursday 21 November 2013 17:41:04 Ivanko B wrote:
end:= result;
==
It means one more memory copying opetation which can be quite
expensive in case of large data (dynarrays,..).
Dynarrays are reference counted - no problem, there will only a pointer be
The 'sub' keyword is just ugly, not an error. ;-)
=
Feels less ugly than function for non-returning procedure for returning :)
Show the glue by the ':=' operator assigning a value to the 'end'
keyword? It doesn't make any sense for me, sorry.
=
To put
No, because it starts statements after 'type' 'const', 'var'.
But they (stack consts types subroutines) can be disabled in teh language.
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 16:32:00 Marcos Douglas wrote:
Who defined that a function HAVE to return a value ALWAYS? Where is
this rule? ;-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Function_(mathematics)
Pupils
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday 21 November 2013 18:39:09 Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Martin Schreiber mse00...@gmail.com
wrote:
Why needs a 'return' statement only before 'end'?
Not only, before end must be
On Thursday 21 November 2013 15:14:32 Marcos Douglas wrote:
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Ivanko B ivankob4m...@gmail.com wrote:
This new world seems to be a forgotten old one - sub[routine] :)
A forgotten old world called MS VisualBasic... =P
Older, my first commercial programming tool
On Thursday 21 November 2013 12:38:19 Marcos Douglas wrote:
sub strfunc(): msestring;
var
result: msestring;
begin
result:= 'The string result:'
if 1 2 then
result:= result + 'mumu';
else
result:= result + 'koko';
end;
end:= result;
probably is too exotic. ;-)
On Thursday 21 November 2013 13:03:01 Ivanko B wrote:
PS:
BTW, accessing values of variables via a special sign ($ mainly') is
excellent feature:
set res_var $input_var
Why is this an excellent feature?
Martin
On Thursday 21 November 2013 13:48:37 Marcos Douglas wrote:
WOW! Exotic too much and worse then use result variable.
Why? It shows clearly that it is a write only variable which can not be
read and can't be forgotten to set.
end is a reserved word, not a variable so it can't receive a
A working example of using RESULT varaiable :
--
function monthsstate(aperiodity: msestring): booleanarty;
begin
setlength(result,12);
if system.pos('Ja',aperiodity) 0 then result[0]:=true else result[0]:=false;
if system.pos('F',aperiodity) 0 then result[1]:=true else
end:= result;
==
It means one more memory copying opetation which can be quite
expensive in case of large data (dynarrays,..).
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software
As to () for no params... Why not to make them arbitrary ?
Me'd rather use them, though.
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R)
On Thursday 21 November 2013 16:12:51 Ivanko B wrote:
end:= 123;
which means assign the sub block with a value. Not that bad when the shock
is over. ;-)
But it may be weird to prepare function code to this final asiigmnent :)
Example?
And a procedere HAVE to NOT return a value ALWAYS :)
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and developers: Be at the forefront of tech innovation.
Intel(R) Software Adrenaline delivers
On Thursday 21 November 2013 13:49:29 Ivanko B wrote:
Grouping the parameter signature by '(' ')' is better IMO.
===
But it makes () for no params mandatory which looks a bit ugly for
PASCAL folk :)
It is necessary because of orthogonality anyway, clearly denotes the calling
of a
But they (stack consts types subroutines) can be disabled in teh
language.
What do you want to say with this?
As in C/C++ which force all (but cycle vars) type const subroutine
declarations to be top-level.
--
Grouping the parameter signature by '(' ')' is better IMO.
===
But it makes () for no params mandatory which looks a bit ugly for
PASCAL folk :)
--
Shape the Mobile Experience: Free Subscription
Software experts and
On Thursday 21 November 2013 12:28:30 Marcos Douglas wrote:
a) New sintaxe for procedure:
function func(a: bool8);
begin
// do not need the return keyword
end;
b) New sintaxe for function:
function func(a: bool8): int32;
begin
// do need the return keyword
return 123;
end;
That
the sintaxe end:= result; is very ugly!
===
No for everyone. It can even be expanded to pipes etc. Remember the
BASH syntax :
---
cat /tmp/fc-list.txt | egrep -v ^[ \t]*$ | awk \
-v OPT1=$SHORTPATHS \
-v OPT2=$AUTOSHORTGS \
-v OPT3=$PSF_ONLYALIASES \
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo
