On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 01:34:56PM -0400, Andrew Kohlsmith wrote: > On Wednesday 08 August 2007 1:17:24 pm Jay R. Ashworth wrote: > > > Digium has taken the stance that it's better to set arbitrary variable > > > names to arbitrary values rather than allow what many would consider the > > > perfectly accepted method of using a $? type of return code in addition > > > to any application-specific variables. > > > Digium has taken the stance that Structured Programming is a Bad Idea? > > I don't think it's fair to paint it quite so broadly. M opinion on it is > that > I have simply failed to show them how clear things become when I can > check ONE variable for the status of the last-run application, whether > that be a dial, system or agi application call. > > Look at the Asterisk source; it's not a mass of spaghetti code. Saying > that Digium thinks that structured programming is a bad idea is an > exaggeration.
The original responder unclearly implied that functions couldn't return parameters except as globals; it's been cleared up. My apologies. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink [EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274 _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
