(j3.2006) F08/0058, was Re: Interp letter ballot #25

[Malcolm Cohen]

Van Snyder wrote:
>-C-  ---  F08/0058   ENTRY point RESULT variable
>            There's nothing wrong with the interpretation, or the answer
>            or edits, but it does raise the question whether the RESULT
>            name of an entry statement is allowed to be the same as a
>            dummmy argument of the function statement, or an earlier entry
>            statement.  This is probably a question for a different
>            interp.

There is no question.  A dummy argument is not a function result, ergo we are 
talking about two different variables, that is class (1) entities with the same 
name in the same scoping unit.  This is already forbidden by the scoping rules.

Cheers,
-- 
................................Malcolm Cohen, Nihon NAG, Tokyo.