Le 23 mars 07 à 23:37 Soir, Guyren Howe a écrit:
> The semantics I've proposed are perfectly clear eg in the case of
> nesting function calls. And if we fixed the inability to write array
> subscripts after array-returning functions:
>
> SomeFun(someValue)(1)
>
> and stipulated that the return could also be treated a an array, then
> you'd answer questions such as "what if I only want the count".
As Norman said:
> How would you use it in a case like
>
> if FunctionReturningAndIntAndString() = ? then
Really, it does not make much sense.
Even using this:
if FunctionReturningAndIntAndString() = (i,s) then
what if i is equal but not s? Is that an "and" or an "or"?
In my opinion, this makes things less clear. Also, even if you hate
ByRefs (that's also my case), there are "plenty" of other ways to
return a value, so why bother making another (confusing) way?
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
