Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ut-ngp.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!kjm
From: kjm@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ken Montgomery)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re:  C question
Message-ID: <1617@ut-ngp.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 16-Apr-85 10:22:49 EST
Article-I.D.: ut-ngp.1617
Posted: Tue Apr 16 10:22:49 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 18-Apr-85 02:43:35 EST
References: <9879@brl-tgr.ARPA> <> <515@udenva.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: U.Texas Computation Center, Austin, Texas
Lines: 29

[]

From: lspirkov@udenva.UUCP (Goldilocks)
>In article <> jack@boring.UUCP (Jack Jansen) writes:
>>
>>procedure p(var i:integer):integer;
              ^^^
>>begin
>>    p := i;
>>    i := i+1;
>>end (* p *);
>>
>
>you obviously don't know your pascal!  a function returns
>something.  a procedure doesn't.
>
>                                        Goldi

The 'var' keyword has the effect that the value of 'i' is assigned
to the corresponding actual parameter in the calling routine at the
termination of the called routine.

--
The above viewpoints are mine.  They are unrelated to
those of anyone else, including my cats and my employer.

Ken Montgomery  "Shredder-of-hapless-smurfs"
...!{ihnp4,allegra,seismo!ut-sally}!ut-ngp!kjm  [Usenet, when working]
kjm@ut-ngp.ARPA  [for Arpanauts only]