Making the move...

Mark Smith mark at
Tue Mar 21 20:16:38 EST 2006

You might put the multiple results into the elements of an array, and  
return the array.


On 22 Mar 2006, at 00:55, Sarah Reichelt wrote:

> On 3/21/06, Geoff Canyon <gcanyon at> wrote:
>> Do you have an example? I agree that if you end up passing in a
>> handful of arguments by reference, you haven't accomplished much by
>> breaking out the routine. The question is if there isn't a better way
>> to slice the routine, where that wouldn't be necessary.
> OK, I have a better example. Say I have a data set and I need to loop
> through it and extract three different pieces of information e.g. a
> list of the 4th column in each line, a list of lines that match a
> certain set of criteria, and a cumulative total obtained by adding a
> certain column in each line.
> Each of these could be done in a separate function, but that would
> mean looping through the data set three times. With a large data set,
> it is significantly faster to loop once, filling all three new
> variables in the single loop. If I separate this off into a separate
> function, then I need a way of passing multiple results back.
> The alternatives that I see are to use script local variables or to
> pass an empty parameter by reference and have the function fill it.
> Does anyone have any other ideas or recommendations?
> Sarah
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your  
> subscription preferences:

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list