David A. Black wrote:
> Hi --
> 
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2003, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> 
> 
>>On Fri, Dec 19, 2003 at 10:28:49PM +0900, David A. Black wrote:
>>
>>>>>That might be the best way if you don't need to deal with the two
>>>>>values as a pair beyond getting them back from the method.
>>>>
>>>>Even if you need to deal with them as pair this is the appropriate method:
>>>
>>>Do you mean: even if you don't need to deal... ?
>>
>>No, the original message addressed the not-needing-to-deal; this was the
>>opposite.  The point is, the caller can do either:
>>
>>        var1, var2 = obj.meth
>>
>>and thereby get the results in separate variables, or
>>
>>        onevar = obj.meth
>>
>>and get the results as an array stored in a single variable.
> 
> 
> Yes, that was our starting point :-) My var1, var2 suggestion was as
> an alternative to the grabbing-as-an-array approach.  I think the
> subsequent confusion was over the word 'pair', which I took to mean
> 'array' in Robert's usage.  
> 
> Anyway, Robert seemed to be suggesting that, of the two ways that have
> been demonstrated, returning a single array is the 'appropriate' way
> and that was what I wasn't following.  

A semantic issue. But then, isn't everything?

The actual return is an array either way. Whether you then assign
it to one var or two is beyond the control or concern of the method.

Hal