On Mar 24, 2007, at 12:20 PM, realbasic-nug- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Message: 19 > Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2007 12:19:08 -0400 > From: Charles Yeomans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: FR: Functions should support multiple return values > To: REALbasic NUG <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed > > > On Mar 23, 2007, at 9:48 PM, Guyren Howe wrote: > >> On Mar 23, 2007, at 7:23 PM, Arnaud Nicolet wrote: >> >>> 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? >> >> Because it's absurd overkill to define a new class as a way of >> holding multiple values, when all that's going on is that you need to >> return multiple values from some computation. >> >> I love OOP. But often, it's just overkill. When *all* that's going on >> is that I'm performing some computation that generates multiple >> values, I would like to just be able to return those multiple values. >> >> Why should returning a single value be easy but multiple values be a >> pain in the proverbial? I don't see anything special about returning >> one value. >> _______________________________________________ > > > If you're looking for language additions to advocate for, multiple > dispatch would be a better choice, because the need for it already > exists in the language. > > Charles Yeomans
I can't see why Arnaud doesn't just return a dictionary, which can hold as many values or things of as many different types as he'd like. What *is* multiple dispatch, and how is it useful, by the way? gary hayenga _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
