From help-octave-request at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu Tue Nov 4 22:59:34 2003 Subject: Re: Realtime cost of call by value From: Tomer Altman To: Randy Gober cc: help-octave at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 04:58:51 +0000 (UTC) I don't really care too much for '&' versus any other identifyer, the only thing that I have a strong opinion on is that the syntax should be limited to the function definition, not the function call. This will avoid breaking existing code, etc. ~Tomer On Nov 4, 2003 at 8:23pm, Randy Gober wrote: GoberR >Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 20:23:20 -0600 GoberR >From: Randy Gober GoberR >To: help-octave at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu GoberR >Subject: Re: Realtime cost of call by value GoberR >Resent-Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 20:23:52 -0600 GoberR >Resent-From: help-octave at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu GoberR > GoberR > GoberR >|From help-octave-request at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu Tue Nov 4 GoberR >09:52:02 2003 GoberR >|Subject: Re: Realtime cost of call by value GoberR >|From: "Mark P. Esplin" GoberR >|To: help-octave GoberR >|Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 10:49:37 -0500 GoberR >| GoberR >| For what it is worth, I like the C++ syntax with a "&" best then GoberR >"byref" GoberR >|next GoberR > GoberR > GoberR >I also like &A. It makes for since for an argument list as in GoberR > GoberR > function multiarg(&A,B,&C,D,&E) GoberR > GoberR > GoberR >Using byref or reference can get to be bit cumbersome, e.g. GoberR > GoberR > function multiarg(reference A,B,reference C,D,reference E) GoberR > GoberR > GoberR > GoberR >--Randy GoberR > GoberR > GoberR > GoberR > GoberR > GoberR > GoberR > ------------------------------------------------------------- Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL. Octave's home on the web: http://www.octave.org How to fund new projects: http://www.octave.org/funding.html Subscription information: http://www.octave.org/archive.html -------------------------------------------------------------