Guillaume Cottenceau wrote:
> On 5/20/05, James Britt <james_b / neurogami.com> wrote:
> 
>>Eric Mahurin wrote:
>>
>>>I've never quite understood why most languages inherently
>>>support returning only a single value
>>
>>Conceptual elegance?
>>
>>Seems cleaner to say that every expression returns an object, though
>>that the object may be a container for other objects, rather than assert
>>that expressions may return an unknown number of objects
> 
> 
> Then you would prefer that a function/method only takes one object as
> parameter, for conceptual elegance?

Maybe. A vector.

Or, um, a list.

James

-- 

http://www.ruby-doc.org - The Ruby Documentation Site
http://www.rubyxml.com  - News, Articles, and Listings for Ruby & XML
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com  - Playing with Better Toys