RE: Eu's poor design
Matt Lewis wrote:
>
>
> > From: Andreas Rumpf [mailto:pfropfen at gmx.net]
>
> > Derek Parnell wrote:
>
> > > I'll send you an implementation of stacks, if you like that
> > > demonstrates my assertion.
> >
> > I guess, I already know your implementation: You use a global
> > sequence which contains all the stacks and use an index to
> > access a particular one. We had this.
>
> OK, first, he's not going to use a 'global' variable. He'll use a
> 'local'
> variable. That's contained within a file's scope, so no globals are
> required. Perhaps it's better to think about this as 'static'. Either
> way.
Ok, let's call it 'static'. It doesn't matter.
> It seems that what you'd like to do is store the stack itself outside of
> the
> stack code's source file, and pass it by reference. You could still do
> somehting like this, albeit without the pass by reference (think
> append/prepend). It wouldn't be very elegant, but that's what you get
> for
> forcing a design.
Forcing a design? What's wrong with doing it efficiently?
Please read the last posts.
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
