[...]Here I cannot follow you. - The C-compiler can analyze code to do
The rough equivalent of the distinction between Pascal procedures and functions is that procedures are like C functions that have "void" return type. It's fine (and not at all a bad idea) for a language to distinguish between void and non-void like this. What cannot easily be done in a clear and consistent way is to distinguish between two expressions of type "int" (or any other general non-void type).
optimizations and even (as so often stated) "assume" things about
the intent concerning UB and optimization but cannot value facts
about types and context? - If so, then it sounds rather arbitrary.
[...]By "would not do anything" you probably mean that it would not have
It is also fine for a language to distinguish between "pure" functions and functions/procedures with side-effects and/or functions/procedures with observable behaviour. (A "pure procedure" would not do anything.)
side-effects on/with relatively global entities in the program?
As far as I remember, Pascal does not make that distinction.Pascal functions and procedures can affect and be affected by global
entities. Predefined functions and procedures can have side effects
also unrelated to global entities in the program (e.g. print effect).
A procedure/function not affecting the global (or surrounding stack)
environment could likely be identified. But here we're anyway talking
about the (clean!) return-interface of functions (as opposed to the
procedures).
Janis
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.