Re: manual terminology: `procedure', `function' etc.

[Mikael Djurfeldt <mdj@nada.kth.se>]

"Paul R. Wilson" <wilson@cs.utexas.edu> writes:

> What is the point of distinguishing between primitive and non-primitive
> procedures?  This seems like an implementation detail that most programmers
> should NOT depend on, and which you want to be able to change.  For
> example, if you get a decent compiler and simplify the system to have
> fewer primitives, your documentation will be out of date.
> 
> Under normal circumstances, programmers have no business depending
> on how a procedure is constructed.  Is documenting the difference
> a hint about performance, or a guide to people looking for source,
> or what?

You and Gary are of course right.  We shouldn't document whether a
procedure is primitive or not.  (I apologize for the useless input I
give to this discussion. :)  I answer only because your letter was
directed to me.)

/mdj