Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

[Branden]

James Mastros wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 08:43:02PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 11:46:48AM -0500, James Mastros wrote:
> > > By the time you get to the last line, you've already forgoten WTF you
named
> > > the return variable.
> > Eh, I don't think that bad memory, or a bad variable naming scheme
> > justifies this new feature.
> A new feature doesn't need that much justification.  And nobody is
> advocating getting rid of "return".

Yes it does. Otherwise, we get even more bloated than now!

- Branden