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 My impression is that S02 is newer and S06 is out of date here.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 "of". Larry
