Re: A challenge for RosAsm
- From: "hutch--" <hutch@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 30 Jun 2005 00:20:44 -0700
My opinion about Macros:
> * + reduces source size on cost of 'direct readability'
No, just puts it somewhere else so you read the heading.
> bloats the .exe (in hidden form)
This is nonsense, you get what you write with a macro.
> * + minor convenience for lazy programmers
Major convenience for efficient ones.
> * - any change in it will affect many program parts.
Reusable code is like that.
> So if I need several similar code parts, I either
> write one routine which cover all wanted variations, or
> I just copy/paste and modify as desired.
One routine for all is bloated in comparison to a dedicated algo.
Copy/paste is slow, unreliable and error prone.
> And I never would hide any code block, as parts and trails
> often can be used more than one time, so I must see it.
Must be fun with a magabyte of source in hex. :)
Regards,
hutch at movsd dot com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: A challenge for RosAsm
- From: wolfgang kern
- Re: A challenge for RosAsm
- References:
- A challenge for RosAsm
- From: Randall Hyde
- Re: A challenge for RosAsm
- From: Betov
- Re: A challenge for RosAsm
- From: Randall Hyde
- Re: A challenge for RosAsm
- From: Betov
- Re: A challenge for RosAsm
- From: Randall Hyde
- Re: A challenge for RosAsm
- From: wolfgang kern
- A challenge for RosAsm
- Prev by Date: Re: A challenge for RosAsm
- Next by Date: Re: Article about HLA on Linux Journal's website
- Previous by thread: Re: A challenge for RosAsm
- Next by thread: Re: A challenge for RosAsm
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|