home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
The CDPD Public Domain Collection for CDTV 4
/
CDPD_IV.bin
/
e
/
mailinglists
/
amigae.0993sept.archive
/
000072_crash!kirk.safb.af.mil!BWILLS_Mon, 27 Sep 93 05:42:10 PST.msg
< prev
next >
Wrap
Internet Message Format
|
1994-05-26
|
2KB
Received: by bkhouse.cts.com (V1.16/Amiga)
id AA00000; Mon, 27 Sep 93 05:42:10 PST
Received: from kirk.safb.af.mil by crash.cts.com with smtp
(Smail3.1.28.1 #18) id m0ohHGz-0000E0C; Mon, 27 Sep 93 05:01 PDT
Message-Id: <m0ohHGz-0000E0C@crash.cts.com>
Date: 27 Sep 93 07:00:00 CST
From: "Barry D. Wills" <BWILLS@kirk.safb.af.mil>
To: "amigae" <amigae@bkhouse.cts.com>
Subject: re: how does E stack?
>BTW: thank you for the PROC suggestion for handling struct.struct.struct
Quite welcome.
>RE: My comment that I loathe global variables, and I have to do strange things
>to work around it with E, due to lack of OOP features
>
>| Hm, what do you have to do?
>
>I either have to pass a bunch of pointers, create an object whose pointer I'd
>have to pass, or do very cumbersome case statements (I think Wouter made a
>comment once about a very nasty-looking case statement I had... he suggested I
>consider using more PROCs, but I didn't feel like creating the case-statement I
>would have had to make).
Yes, EPP's source is like that, 10 million parameters for each function call.
The last versions were a compromise, but still use too many parameters. I
have yet to find a nice even balance between global/local vars. I've tried
both routes, maybe my next project will be a step in the right direction.
>You should see it.. it is almost a work of horror-art... I have a case
>statement that extends for several pages, and one of the cases extends for
>about two pages.. all because I wanted to avoid using global variables. I'm
Gaah! &-b
>I'm trying to imagine anyone even bothering to PROGRAM in AmigaBASIC <shudder>.
It was affordable at the time. :-/
[gurus]
>Just out of curiosity, have you ever had your C++ compilor (I've noticed that
>we've both tried to avoid naming the company who sells it) guru DURING the
>compilation of the code? I'm not talking about the code guruing when you try
No. Guess I was fortunate there.
>I will grant this as an acolade higher than I can assign to any other writer of
>programming languages, and that is, simply, that Wouter van [name incredibly
>too long for me to remember well] supports E EXTREMELY well.
Yes, he's a very supportive programmer. And a nice guy, too.
-- Barry