For sure, it depends. I think I remember this so distinctly because you actually said "amen" to me, which doesn't happen every day. :) http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg02534.html
For me it was an eye-opener (coming from C/C++) that a function could return multiple values without me absolutely having to define a struct to do so. I recognized all those times in C/C++ that I needed to return just 2 or 3 values, and needing to define a gratuitous struct was as annoying as always needing to name a function. So that seemed pretty cool. But a new hammer can elicit hallucinations of nails. So it was also cool when I realized not to get too carried away with it. I just thought that observation might be helpful to have in the guide, at least for folks like me. On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 6:21 PM, Matthias Felleisen <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sep 23, 2011, at 6:15 PM, Greg Hendershott wrote: > >> This reminded me of advice on this list: Use a struct instead of >> `values', to return from a function more than maybe 2 or 3 items. That >> might be good to add to the guide, too? > > > Depends on the situation. > > Even the struct over list advice is partial and I won't always > do so, especially when I know that the data is entirely local > to a module. Lists are just so convenient (have tons of functions). > > -- Matthias > > _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
