home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.sys.mac.programmer:21150 comp.sys.mac.oop.misc:209
- Path: sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu!tamsun.tamu.edu!tamsun.tamu.edu!news
- From: bpb9204@tamsun.tamu.edu (Brent Burton)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer,comp.sys.mac.oop.misc
- Subject: Re: David Betz and Bob Language
- Date: 10 Jan 1993 21:32:32 -0600
- Organization: Texas A&M Univ., Inc.
- Lines: 29
- Message-ID: <1iqpogINNk5q@tamsun.tamu.edu>
- References: <01050133.mp32gx@distant.uucp> <1i886lINNg1v@tamsun.tamu.edu> <1993Jan8.090854.13216@netcom.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: tamsun.tamu.edu
-
- gort@netcom.com (george harrington) writes:
- |In article <1i886lINNg1v@tamsun.tamu.edu> bpb9204@tamsun.tamu.edu (Brent Burton) writes:
- |>
- |> [... about passing LOTS of arguments to a function ...]
- |>Well, the stuff, for the most part, will work, but I can't put too much
- |>confidence into code that uses anticonventions like your above example.
- |>
- |Actually, this is the way functions are defined in unix shells; probably
- |the reasoning is to allow for a variable number of parameters. You
- |would write
- | for i
- | do
- | some code here
- | done
- |
- |and i would loop across all the parameters.
-
- Point taken, but the shell programming technique is due to the
- environment. The same technique, when used in a language such
- as C with features to *cleanly* access 10 or 50 arguments, just
- does not make good programming sense to me. I consider it
- a kludge, and a sloppy one at that.
-
- -Brent
- --
- +-------------------------+
- | Brent Burton N5VMG |
- | bpb9204@tamsun.tamu.edu |
- +-------------------------+
-