On Monday 03 September 2001 10:27 pm, Dan Sugalski wrote: > >To me, that seems only a language decision. This could certainly handle > >that. > > Ah, but calling in the first way has two PMCs in as parameters, while the > second has only one. Potentially at least. A world of difference there. A single PMC? (A list of pointers to PMCs?) Or, to think of it another way, how are you going to pass two scalars, or an array of two scalars, to a sub with *no* prototype? -- Bryan C. Warnock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Prototypes Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Prototypes Damian Conway
- Re: Prototypes Michael G Schwern
- Re: Prototypes Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Prototypes Dan Sugalski
- Re: Prototypes Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Prototypes Dan Sugalski
- Re: Prototypes Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Prototypes Dan Sugalski
- Re: Prototypes Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Prototypes Dan Sugalski
- Re: Prototypes Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Prototypes Ken Fox
- Re: Prototypes Dan Sugalski
- Re: Prototypes Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Prototypes Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Prototypes Damian Conway
- RE: Prototypes Garrett Goebel
- Re: Prototypes Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Prototypes Damian Conway