Re: [Gretl-devel] still some function package editing problems
On Sat, 27 Jan 2007, Sven Schreiber quoted:
> Not sure I agree on that. A function may, for example, print
something
> the user is interested in (e.g. some sort of hypothesis test) and offer
> a return that is only of interest to experts (say, a vector of
> relatively "raw" values that could be further processed).
>
> Why should the GUI user be forced to assign the return, when the script
> user is free to ignore it?
and wrote:
Good point!
On the other hand, there may be some packaged functions whose
whole point is to return something, and where it doesn't really
make sense to ignore the return -- perhaps they don't print
anything. I guess that is what you were thinking of. Maybe
(perhaps later) we should provide a way for a function author to
indicate whether the return can sensibly be ignored or not -- some
suitable inflection on the "return" statement?
Allin.