Hi all,
I do not like to say ?me too?, but in this case:
Me too: I do not saw what is the problem (even if Nathan?s example is clear and
I understand it).
But, since we have a comment from Mars Saxman *, I prefer to see REAL Software
removing more bugs (which bugs ?) and improving
actual REALbasic features (just like the brand new Vector stuff), etc. (I do
not want to add a new thread on some already discussed
features, so I do not add other features I want to be improved).
Emile
* Mars Saxman previous answer:
>It's certainly possible, but it would be a good bit of work. It doesn't
>break the syntax, but it's a radical change in semantics.
>Subject: Re: Ability to have more then one Return Value
>From: "Charles Yeomans" <yeomans at desuetude dot com>
>Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 13:55:42 -0400
I'm not so sure that I like this. For this example, I think that it
would make more sense to have a Server object with address and port
properties.
Charles Yeomans
On Saturday, July 27, 2002, at 01:18 PM, Nathan Fisher wrote:
>
> On a somewhat similar note, it would be nice for functions to be able
> to return more than one value. This would require a bit of a change to
> the compiler's syntax, but would eliminate the need for "wrapper
> classes" in a lot of instances.
>
> For example, right now I might call GetAddressAndPort(Server) to get
> the server's address and port. As it is now, I would probably have to
> return it as a single string, like "192.168.1.15:110" and nthfield out
> the results. This would be so much handier:
>
> Sub GetAddressAndPort(Server as string) as string,integer
> or
> Sub GetAddressAndPort(Server as string) as string, as integer
>
> and call it like
>
> Address, Port=GetAddressAndPort(Server)
>
> Does something like this have a prayer of being implemented? As far as
> I can tell, it doesn't break existing syntax.
|