Discussion about return types: https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/1090
On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 7:25:47 PM UTC+2, Scott Jones wrote: > > I see that now, for some reason trying to do search on (:: in the docs > on-line didn't bring up anything... > >> Search Results >> Your search did not match any documents. Please make sure that all words >> are spelled correctly and that you've selected enough categories. >> > > However, I don't think that just having it implied in some section about > something else is really "documented" ;-) > When I first saw it, I even wondered if it was some way of indicating the > return type of a method... > (btw, *is* there any way of giving an indication of the return type?) > > Scott > > On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 1:13:03 PM UTC-4, Tamas Papp wrote: >> >> I think it is implied that you can do this: there are quite a few >> examples in the manual, eg >> https://julia.readthedocs.org/en/latest/manual/types/#value-types >> >> Best, >> >> Tamas >> >> On Tue, Apr 21 2015, Scott Jones <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Ah, thanks for the *very* quick reply. That’s quite useful. >> > Did I somehow miss the explanation in the documentation (of 0.4), or >> does >> > that need to be added to the documentation of methods? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Scott >> > >> > On Tuesday, April 21, 2015 at 11:41:45 AM UTC-4, Stefan Karpinski >> wrote: >> >> >> >> It means that the argument doesn't get a local name but the method is >> only >> >> called if the argument in that position matches the type on the RHS of >> the >> >> :: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Scott Jones <[email protected] >> >> <javascript:>> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Just what does it mean, if there is a type but no formal parameter >> name, >> >>> in a function definition? >> >>> I tried to find it in the documentation, but nothing came up... >> >>> >> >>> Thanks, >> >>> Scott >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> >
