Xref: utzoo comp.std.c++:283 comp.lang.misc:5447
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!decwrl!bacchus.pa.dec.com!shlump.nac.dec.com!tkou02.enet.dec.com!diamond
From: diamond@tkou02.enet.dec.com (diamond@tkovoa)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++,comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Lack of distinction between input & output fn parameters
Message-ID: <1944@tkou02.enet.dec.com>
Date: 3 Sep 90 07:03:25 GMT
References: <1990Aug31.234937.29938@athena.mit.edu>
Reply-To: diamond@tkou02.enet.dec.com (diamond@tkovoa)
Followup-To: comp.lang.misc
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Japan , Tokyo
Lines: 16


In article <1990Aug31.234937.29938@athena.mit.edu> ahodgson@hstbme.mit.edu.UUCP (Antony Hodgson) writes:

>I was thinking that a clearer syntax might be something like the following:
>	void (Vector Evals, Matrix EVectors) EigenStuff( Matrix A )
>and	errorcode (Object X) SomeFunction( int i )
>and the functions could be used as follows:
>	( EVals, EVectors ) = EigenStuff( A )
>and	if ( (X) = SomeFunction(i) == BAD_NEWS ) ...

I like this idea.  I have redirected it to comp.lang.misc, where it belongs.
Don't look for it to be added to an existing language.

-- 
Norman Diamond, Nihon DEC       diamond@tkou02.enet.dec.com
We steer like a sports car:  I use opinions; the company uses the rack.