From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,9e90e30a519a635b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Geoff Bull <geoff@research.canon.com.au>
Subject: Re: return statements in procedures
Date: 2000/06/05
Message-ID: <393B478D.642D9C31@research.canon.com.au>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 631163779
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <393B2054.618F6E80@baesystems.com.au>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: usenet@research.canon.com.au
X-Trace: cass.research.canon.com.au 960186204 15114 203.12.174.227 (5 Jun 2000
 06:23:24 GMT)
Organization: Canon Information Systems Research Australia
Mime-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: 5 Jun 2000 06:23:24 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 2000-06-05T06:23:24+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Matthew Daniel wrote:
> 
> There is one who believes it is acceptable for certain circumstances and
> the rest of us do not believe it should occur.
> 
> just seeing what every one else thinks.

Given appropriate circumstances, anything is acceptable.
If return statements in procedures were never acceptable,
the language designers would have made them illegal.