Timeline for Writing Clean, Elegant Procedural Code (BASIC): Is There Such a Thing?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
3 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 19, 2013 at 17:28 | comment | added | Jeff Langemeier | Mechanisms to mimic scoping is what the assembly really does anyway, you don't have functions in assembly, you have indirect addressing modes that will go to ram or rom locations and some stack pointer arithmatic. As for subroutine naming, I would aim for setting a coding standard, like 4-5 letter acronym using the letters from the words that would be there, GET_BEST_CUSTOMER becomes GBC or GBCUST, if you have a set subroutine you'll be able to see relation SBCUST, etc... | |
| Feb 19, 2013 at 15:17 | comment | added | Tom Tom | The naming stuff is very informative - thank you. I do struggle with the notion of short subroutine names (in some instances, at least). By way of a (trivial, fictitious) example, what would you rename the subroutine in the example to? Alas the point remains - introducing a mechanism in place of actual scoping is the way to deal with the issue here. I agree on the final point, too. The tasks I'm dealing with are all very... Procedural. It actually seems quite natural to express them as such. | |
| Feb 19, 2013 at 13:54 | history | answered | Jeff Langemeier | CC BY-SA 3.0 |