On 10/1/2012 7:22 PM, Michael Sokolov wrote:
Sorry, I think I neglected to include a let before a couple of the
returns.
I thought that might be the case.
But my main point was the unusual (and probably unfamiliar to
people used to other languages) change in the interpretation of
parentheses when they follow the return keyword and when they follow the
return function.
That is confusing.
The other thing that confuses people is that functions don't use the
"return" keyword and instead just return the result of evaluating the
contained expression.
Admittedly the idea of defining a function with the same name as a
keyword is contrived and ill-advised, right up there with C++ operator
overloading. It just occurred to me on reading Michael Kay's comment
'There is no function called "return"' that there actually could be one.
Agreed.
-- Ron
_______________________________________________
[email protected]
http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
