🚀 go-pugleaf

Let me repeat that I am assuming separate compilation, and only communication
blocks to integrate the modules.  The unit calling the function refilling the
buffer knows only how to find the function identifier and enough of the 
buffer descriptor to use the buffer and to know how much is left in it.

I see no reason why the function even has to have a name known to the unit
calling it.  It is quite possible that the function can be changed without
the unit knowing that this has happened.  The compiler cannot resolve problems,
because it does not have the slightest idea of what the function is.

Now indirection (pointers) gives an easy way to do this.  None of the critics
of pointers have come up with anything not more clumsy in implementation.
-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@snap.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
{purdue,pur-ee}!snap.stat!hrubin(UUCP)