OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office-formula message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [office-formula] period


> 
> In other words:
> 
> if we define a function
> LUGNUT (Number egg; Integer colour)
> 
> by saying that
> ----------------------------------------------
> egg         is the egg of the individual
> colour      is her subjectively perceived colour
> 
> then LUGNUT returns the value  egg^colour
> ----------------------------------------------
> 
> then there is no need to define what "egg" and "colour" really means
> since the true definition is that LUGNUT returns the value  egg^colour
> So some people may be using it for exponentiation...
> 
> > 
>

It might be worth looking at other ISO programming language standards, 
like C++ to see how they handle library function definitions.  They should 
all have the same issue with a function's formal parameters.

The type of the parameter (Number, Integer, etc.) should be defined once 
and only once, and before any function definitions.  I believe we do that 
right.  The word "egg" is a formal parameter and its meaning is scoped to 
this function only.  If we wanted to, we could call it "parameter-1", 
"parameter-2". We don't need to explain what "egg" means, only how it is 
used to calculate the return value.

However, if we do find ourselves giving domain-specific explanations 
regarding financial conventions, like date counting, etc., then that 
should be factored out of the individual functions and stated once before 
any function definitions.  Don't we do that already?

-Rob


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]