On Mar 25, 2007, at 1:50 PM, Guyren Howe wrote: > No. The lack of multiple return values in the language requires > defining a class, even when there is no other reason to do so. When > I'm required to do work that a suitable language feature would render > unnecessary, and there is no other reason to do that work, I call > that "busy work", and I ask that the feature be changed.
I suspect this is dictated partially by adhering to calling conventions works especially across languages and how that works at the register level of the various CPU's If you use an RB method as a callback from an OS routine which expects certain calling conventions either you need syntax to define that calling convention or you just adhere to what is already widely used (cdecl, pascal, stdcall) REAL would likely need to define a new calling convention for this sort of usage Scripting languages have no such requirement to adhere to this very low level implementation detail but RB does because of how it is a compiled and linked _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
