Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!sun!quintus!pds From: pds@quintus.UUCP (Peter Schachte) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: Language Tenets (was Re: Double Width Integer Multiplication and Division Message-ID: <1242@quintus.UUCP> Date: 15 Aug 89 23:30:58 GMT References: <57125@linus.UUCP> <1989Jun24.230056.27774@utzoo.uucp> <1207@quintus.UUCP> <1406@l.cc.purdue.edu> <2568@etive.ed.ac.uk> <605@skye.ed.ac.uk> <1219@quintus.UUCP> <713@skye.ed.ac.uk> Reply-To: pds@quintus.UUCP (Peter Schachte) Organization: Quintus Computer Systems, Inc. Lines: 17 In article <713@skye.ed.ac.uk> jeff@aiai.uucp (Jeff Dalton) writes: >My point was _not_ that expressions that can't be nested are just as >good as expressions that can be nested but rather that they are useful >nonetheless. My point was that if you allow some expressions to return multiple values and not allow those to be nested, and still allow the other kind that can be nested but can't return multiple values, you really confuse the idea of an expression. Especially if you can't immediately tell which kind an expression is by looking at it. Better to come up with a semantics for handling a multiple-value expression inside another expression, or as an argument to a function. Or just forget multiple values and pass a pointer to where to put the results. -- -Peter Schachte pds@quintus.uucp ...!sun!quintus!pds