Re: Those of us who are C'ly challenged :>
From: Nate Brooman
>It's just that I was always told to code 1 step at
>a time. For example, in QBasic, if I want to code a program, I structurize
>it:
[code snipped]
Precisely. One step at a time. The only real difference in what
you're
describing is that QBasic requires you to declare the routines first, then
comes the main program, then the routines' actual code; whereas in
Euphoria, the routines come first, then the main program, with no
declarations necessary. (except when bypassing that rule with
routine_id() )
QB source looks like:
<Declarations of routines which follow program>
<Main Program>
<Routines declared before program>
EU source looks like:
<Routines>
<Main Program>
Qbasic won't let you use undeclared routines either. (Technically, that is,
actually it generates the declarations for you if you forget them, but in
my experience it often gets the declarations wrong.)
Benefits to Euphoria's 'stricter' structure are:
1. You (or the interpreter) can read code straight through, start to
finish,
and never come across something that hasn't been defined yet. The
interpreter doesn't need to try to 'guess' what something will be, so it's
more efficient.
2. You have more freedom to mix things up. All your routines don't have
to come first or last, you can put main-level code before, between, or after
routines, so long as everything which that bit of code uses already exists.
3. It discourages sloppy programming by encouraging you to know
what the steps will be, and exactly what they will do, before you start
writing the main program, rather than writing a program and then hacking
parts of it off into routines.
4. It's a good deal easier to work with and better looking once you get
used to it. (which won't take long)
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
