Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!chaph.usc.edu!usc.edu!news
From: news@usc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.lang.functional
Subject: Re: Why not multiple out parameters? [again]
Message-ID: <11929@chaph.usc.edu>
Date: 12 Sep 90 00:40:31 GMT
References: <1990Aug28.203643.11214@zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu>
	<4019@rex.cs.tulane.edu> <2501@l.cc.purdue.edu>
	<4060@rex.cs.tulane.edu> <3352@stl.stc.co.uk> <3788@osc.COM>
Sender: news@chaph.usc.edu
Reply-To: raulmill@usc.edu
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 18
Nntp-Posting-Host: girtab.usc.edu
In-reply-to: jgk@osc.COM's message of 11 Sep 90 09:44:45 GMT
Originator: news@girtab.usc.edu

In article <3788@osc.COM> jgk@osc.COM (Joe Keane) writes:

   I think returning a record just gets around the issue.  We don't
   use a single record to pass all the in parameters to a function, so
   why should we do it for out parameters?

What's wrong with getting around the issue?

I can see the need for having two "in parameters" (otherwise, joining
hitherto distinct pieces of information is akward), but I fail to see
the need for multiple "out parameters" in a functional language.
Excuse me for being dense, but what is the range?

If you need to do something on the order of passing different pieces
of information (about some core datum) to multiple function
applications, the proper way would seem to be to construct some
derived function which applies the base functions properly.  (e.g.
J's conjunctions)