[Major: The dreaded word "only"]

[David Cortesi <cbmvax!uunet!INFORMIX.COM!cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu!cortesi>]

[Shoulson...]
> "lat." is not a valid cmene for the same reason as above
[Major...]
> "T" is the name of the truth constant in most implementations of lisp.
> A discussion of a lisp program might well want to refer to "the thing
> named 'T'".

Wouldn't that be: la ty?  (or la ga'e ty?) As in

        xu la fy cu fancu cupra la ga'e ty

    (yes or no: the f function-produces the T)

Discovery: the above tanru is the only way I can find to refer to
"the value returned by function f()."  Certainly for programmers,
>the< key element of a function is what it returns, its value.
I think that's true for purer-math people also; one normally speaks
of "f(x)" meaning, "the value that results from applying f() to x".

Unfortunately "fancu" lacks a place for "value" entirely!  While
"cupra" lacks a place for "from input," leaving no way that
I can find to say, "the value of f() applied to x."

This is definitely something to consider in those last-minute
place-structure revisions...

cupra     pra      produce
         x1 produces x2 by process x3
fancu              function
        x1 is a function of variable(s) x2 (plural/set) over domain x3
defined by expression x4

Following would not be appropriate IMO, it's the wrong kind of "return."

xruti xut xru      return
        x1 returns x2 to x3 from x4; x1 moves x2 back to x3 from x4

Following is the wrong kind of "value":

vamji vam     va'i value
         x1 is a value of x2 to x3 for use x4

Following would require an abstractor for "execution of function f"
as its x2, which would be tedious.

jalge jag     ja'e result
        x1 is a result of action/event/state x2

Dave cortesi@informix.com