karl@haddock (09/03/86)
umcp-cs!chris (Chris Torek) writes: >> foo(c) char &c; { ... >I have no great love for this syntax either; but how else do you >propose to add by-reference parameters? Since you asked. I once suggested "foo(&c) char c; { ... }"; this makes the declaration in the callee match the syntax in the caller. However, I have since decided that the more general reference objects a la C++ are better, since it allows you to write "lfunctions" that can be used on the left side of an assignment (e.g. "x = pop(); ...; push() = x"). But as I mentioned in another posting, "char *&c" is more consistent than "char &c" to declare a reference. (And it's probably better than adding a new keyword.) Karl W. Z. Heuer (ima!haddock!karl; karl@haddock.isc.com), The Walking Lint