[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Search] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [FWP] How fun is stupidity?

To: fwp@technofile.org
Subject: Re: [FWP] How fun is stupidity?
From: John Porter <jdporter@min.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 11:36:04 -0500
In-Reply-To: <200001191324.IAA05338@pollen.cs.concordia.ca>; from mjassels@cs.concordia.ca on Wed, Jan 19, 2000 at 08:24:35AM -0500
References: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0001182207470.2938-100000@crusoe.crusoe.net> <200001191324.IAA05338@pollen.cs.concordia.ca>

* Michael Assels (mjassels@cs.concordia.ca) [000119 08:40]:
> 
> Minor quibble:  Should "function" be replaced everywhere with "subroutine"?

I don't think so; call context applies as much to built-in
functions, "operators", and user-defined subs.
"Function" is probly the most generic term.

-- 
John Porter

"There are people who have fun studying the C++ spec for
literally seconds on end, I'm sure..."    John Vlissides


==== Want to unsubscribe from Fun With Perl?  Well, if you insist...
==== Send email to <fwp-request@technofile.org> with message _body_
====   unsubscribe

References:
- [FWP] How fun is stupidity?
  - From: Jeff Pinyan <jeffp@crusoe.net>
- Re: [FWP] How fun is stupidity?
  - From: Michael Assels <mjassels@cs.concordia.ca>

Prev by Date: Re: [FWP] That was productive...
Next by Date: [FWP] !fwp: weird behavior with sort and unique-ing
Prev by thread: Re: [FWP] How fun is stupidity?
Next by thread: [FWP] What fun are lists?
Navigation: Date Index | Thread Index | Search | Other lists at bumppo.net