Talk:Vector products

What specifically is meant by 'function'? Would 'routine' or 'relinkable code' suffice? I recall that there was some difficulty in another task where there was a hang-up on another task about how languages could implement code asking for the implementation and demonstration of utility code. --Michael Mol 15:48, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Erm, "A named ecapsulation of code with parameters, that can be called with arguments and may return a value"? I've expanded the task description to encompass the main names used: function, method and subroutine. --Paddy3118 16:58, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

'Function' is a sufficient term. 'Routine' would work, but is not better than 'function'. 'Relinkable code' might be a library, not a function. A function can be a Ruby method (or block), a dc string, or a Factor word (or quotation). --Kernigh 00:25, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi Kernigh, I too thought function would be OK but I have expanded in the past too. I am after something with a name, so lambda functions or unnamed blocks would not be best. --Paddy3118 06:32, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

FWIW, when someone asks for a function I'm usually happy to give a procedure in any Tcl solution I write. (Occasionally, I'll make it into a full function if the problem is particularly mathematical – there's a small technical distinction to Tcl programmers – but the difference is really slight.) The key distinction is that it is named, reasonably encapsulated, takes arguments and produces a result (or results). Most programming (and all practical ones) are happy with doing something that matches this. (Brainf***, SNUSP and Piet… well would you write a big app in them? Really?)

WRT “relinkable code”, that makes me think of “library”, which is really the next major level of organization up. I'd be surprised at someone using a shared library like this; it would be so slow, and as fragile as the overlay mechanism that used to exist in old DOS programs back when “640kB was enough for anybody” (except it wasn't). Let's not encourage anyone to go there; it was very painful. –Donal Fellows 22:19, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

"create" ...

IDL has builtins for most of these, or at the most would come to something like total(a*b). Would it be acceptable to just show how this would be done there or do you really want me to "create a function" that merely returns the result of a one-liner?