comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » call

Home » Public Forums » archive » call_method

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: call_method [message #26531 is a reply to message #26480]

Sun, 09 September 2001 20:09

Mark Hadfield
Messages: 783
Registered: May 1995

Senior Member

From: "Craig Markwardt" <craigmnet@cow.physics.wisc.edu>
> I think it is bad form in IDL to intentionally have a procedure and a
> function of the same name which do the same thing.

I don't agree. If there weren't any problems in getting both compiled, then
I think it would be a pretty cool thing. Other languages don't have the
distinction between procedures and functions and they don't suffer for it.

But I don't feel all that strongly about it. It's only a computer language
after all.

> As you say, it is
> too easy to mix them up...

Did I say that? If they both did the same thing (except for one returning a
value) then it wouldn't matter if you did mix them up.

---
Mark Hadfield
m.hadfield@niwa.cri.nz http://katipo.niwa.cri.nz/~hadfield
National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research

--
Posted from clam.niwa.cri.nz [202.36.29.1]
via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		call_method By: Pavel A. Romashkin on Thu, 06 September 2001 12:37
		Re: call_method By: Mark Hadfield on Sun, 09 September 2001 20:09
		Re: call_method By: Dick Jackson on Fri, 07 September 2001 07:38
		Re: call_method By: Craig Markwardt on Fri, 07 September 2001 07:26
		Re: call_method By: Mark Hadfield on Thu, 06 September 2001 21:31
		Re: call_method By: David Fanning on Thu, 06 September 2001 21:09

Previous Topic:	Re: a newbie question on code efficiency
Next Topic:	Re: object graphics to postcript and how to copy an object tree

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Sun Oct 12 03:03:46 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.29715 seconds