[asterisk-dev] European Asterisk Developer's Meet-Up: Last Call

[Nir Simionovich]

Hmmm... Tilghman has a valid point here - I didn't think about that one. In
other words,
the function should affect the variable on one hand, but also return the
value of the operation back to Asterisk - for usage with other applications
and functions.

I think it's the developer's responsibility to decide if he wants to use
that return value or not.

Nir

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Tilghman Lesher <
tilghman at mail.jeffandtilghman.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday 29 April 2009 15:22:25 Benny Amorsen wrote:
> > Tilghman Lesher <tilghman at mail.jeffandtilghman.com> writes:
> > > I think it should be a function, not an application, as its function is
> > > to change a value, not to do something to the channel.
> >
> > There really is nothing to return, and the function would be primarily
> > called for side effects.
>
> exten => _XXX,1,Set(foo=3)
> exten => _XXX,n,While(${DEC(foo)})
> exten => _XXX,n,DoSomethingInteresting
> exten => _XXX,n,EndWhile
>
> --
> Tilghman
>
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com--
>
> asterisk-dev mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20090502/f32434e9/attachment-0001.htm