Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watmum.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watmum!cdshaw
From: cdshaw@watmum.UUCP (Chris Shaw)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re:  Pascal question
Message-ID: <65@watmum.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 19-Apr-85 01:27:59 EST
Article-I.D.: watmum.65
Posted: Fri Apr 19 01:27:59 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Apr-85 01:42:36 EST
References: <1617@ut-ngp.UUCP> <259@moncol.UUCP>
Reply-To: cdshaw@watmum.UUCP (Chris Shaw)
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 50
Summary: Learn the damn language before pontificating !!!

>>
>>function p(var i:integer):integer;
>>
>>begin
>>    p := i;
>>    i := i+1;
>>end (* p *);
>
>I don't have the original article handy, but it almost looks like someone
>was trying to perform the illegal:
>
>	function p(var i:integer):integer;
>
>which would be an attempt at declaring a function which returns two values.
>I pray that somewhere there isn't a compiler which would accept that. 
>-- 
>Name:		John Ruschmeyer

You should hope no such thing !!!!

If you find a Pascal compiler which won't accept this program fragment, 
THROW IT OUT, IT'S WRONG !

Many's the time I've written Pascal functions in the vein above. Quite simply,
it is a very easy way to make functions which have error checking as in C.

Thus:

	function x( var i : integer ) : boolean ;

	begin
	  blah blah blah ;
	  x := error status (success/fail);
	end;


	begin { main program }
	  if( x( y ) )then
	    play with y
	end.

Is a much more natural and useful way of saying the same thing with procedures
using multiple arguments.

(And, yes I tested this, so I'm not just blabbering )

The upshot.. If you're going to talk about a language, learn it first !

Chris Shaw
University of Waterloo