MUD-Dev
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: [MUD-Dev] Introduction
In <199705140820.KAA20287#regoc,srce.hr>, on 05/14/97
at 08:27 PM, silovic#srce,hr (Miroslav Silovic) said:
>Okay, a few examples: One of the situations that happens often is a
>function returning either result or 'I couldn't do it'. With typed
>system, you need to return two values explicitely. With untyped, you
>can return either a list of (integer) 0 (assuming that result is a
>list).
This would seem to presume that all types are simple types and thus
there are no aggregate, complex, or user-defined types in your
language implementation. Why not have the function call return a
structure or equivalent? (cf ColdX's frobs (which I don't like BTW as
they seem a hacked design solution))
--
J C Lawrence Internet: claw#null,net
(Contractor) Internet: coder#ibm,net
---------------(*) Internet: clawrenc#cup,hp.com
...Honorary Member Clan McFUD -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...
- Thread context:
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Introduction, (continued)
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Introduction,
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA, Mon 12 May 1997, 21:50 GMT
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Introduction,
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA, Tue 13 May 1997, 12:59 GMT
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Introduction,
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA, Tue 13 May 1997, 13:04 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]