On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 2:57 PM, anonymous wrote:
> Where programs should store their options? Sometimes it is said that
> global variables are bad, but what is better? Some huge structure
> storing all options? Of course, they can be divided into many
> structures or they can be passed on a stack
[2010-01-25 02:10] anonymous
> > TAOUP also recommends small programs that do just one thing. If you
> > have so many options that you need a "huge structure" to store them,
> > that might be a sign that your program is overly complex. Consider
> > factoring it into a set of smaller cooperating
> TAOUP also recommends small programs that do just one thing. If you
> have so many options that you need a "huge structure" to store them,
> that might be a sign that your program is overly complex. Consider
> factoring it into a set of smaller cooperating processes.
It is not too big, but the
Well said.
> TAOUP also recommends small programs that do just one thing. If you
> have so many options that you need a "huge structure" to store them,
> that might be a sign that your program is overly complex. Consider
> factoring it into a set of smaller cooperating processes.
>
> Many people
On Sun 24 Jan 2010 at 11:57:34 PST anonymous wrote:
Where programs should store their options? Sometimes it is said that
global variables are bad, but what is better? Some huge structure
storing all options? Of course, they can be divided into many
structures or they can be passed on a stack inst
Where programs should store their options? Sometimes it is said that
global variables are bad, but what is better? Some huge structure
storing all options? Of course, they can be divided into many
structures or they can be passed on a stack instead of passing pointer
to structure but it is not effe
