Then you just do something like (using C-like & and * operations, just pretend they don't already mean something else)
every xref := &(x1 | x2 | x3 | ...) do { *xref := f(*xref) }
or more compactly:
every (xref := &(x1 | x2 | x3 | ...)) :*= f(*xref)
And now f can be any plain old function.
Any suggestions for what actual syntax is possible for this?
Louis
Majorinc, Kazimir wrote:
Steve asked why not use structures, for example. X:=f(X) instead x1|...|x10=f(x1,..,x10)
Replacement of every x1|...|x10:=f(x1,...,x10) with X:=f(X) seems excelent if X is some structure that could be used on many places, but if it has sense only for that single function f, then I believe there is no better alternative, otherwise one needs either
X:=f([ro, phi, sigma, D, ...]) #it is not always x1,x2... ro:=X[1] phi:=X[2] sigma:=X[3] ... or to carry X through whole procedure.
----
Kazimir Majorinc, Zagreb, Croatia
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by OSDN developer relations Here's your chance to show off your extensive product knowledge We want to know what you know. Tell us and you have a chance to win $100 http://www.zoomerang.com/survey.zgi?HRPT1X3RYQNC5V4MLNSV3E54 _______________________________________________ Unicon-group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/unicon-group
