On Sat, Aug 02, 2008 at 01:50:42AM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
> According to S02, "The word returns is allowed as an alias for of." and
> "The as property specifies a constraint to be enforced on the return
> value ..., is not advertised as the type of the routine"
> However, S06 states, "
> returns/is returns
> The inner type constraint that a routine imposes on its return value.
> which is a direct contradiction, and does not mention "as" in the list.
> My impression is that S02 is newer and S06 is out of date here. Is that
> correct? I'll make proposed edits to the file to send back to the
> maintainer, once I know which way is correct.
Yes, that is correct--"returns" used to be the way to specify "as" type,
but we introduced "as" for that and now "returns" is synonymous with