[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "procedure" vs. "function"
From: |
Michael Hendry |
Subject: |
Re: "procedure" vs. "function" |
Date: |
Sat, 18 Apr 2015 15:46:55 +0100 |
> On 18 Apr 2015, at 13:06, Brian Barker <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> At 12:55 18/04/2015 +0100, Michael Hendry wrote:
>> I think it was Pascal that introduced a distinction between a Procedure
>> (which does something without returning a value) and a Function (which does
>> something AND returns a value).
>
> Really?!
>
> Pascal: published 1970
> Fortran II (included SUBROUTINE and FUNCTION): published 1958.
I’m obviously not old enough!
(Actually I’m so old I forgot to engage my brain before speaking!).
M
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal_%28programming_language%29
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortran#FORTRAN_II
>
> Brian Barker
- Re: "procedure" vs. "function", (continued)
Re: "procedure" vs. "function", Michael Hendry, 2015/04/18
Re: "procedure" vs. "function", David Nalesnik, 2015/04/18
- Re: "procedure" vs. "function", Jacques Menu, 2015/04/18
- Re: "procedure" vs. "function", David Nalesnik, 2015/04/18
- Re: "procedure" vs. "function", PMA, 2015/04/18
- Re: "procedure" vs. "function", PMA, 2015/04/18
- Re: "procedure" vs. "function", J Martin Rushton, 2015/04/18
- Re: "procedure" vs. "function", PMA, 2015/04/18
- Re: "procedure" vs. "function", J Martin Rushton, 2015/04/18
Re: "procedure" vs. "function", Wols Lists, 2015/04/18
Re: "procedure" vs. "function", PMA, 2015/04/18