Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!pacbell.com!pacbell!noe!marc
From: marc@noe.UUCP (Marc de Groot)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth
Subject: Re: Files vs Blocks
Message-ID: <924@noe.UUCP>
Date: 13 Oct 90 09:25:24 GMT
References: <9010101326.AA20001@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Sender: root@noe.UUCP
Reply-To: marc@noe.UUCP (Marc de Groot)
Organization: Noe Systems, San Francisco
Lines: 21

In article <9010101326.AA20001@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Mitch Bradley <wmb%MITCH.ENG.SUN.COM@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU> writes:
>I hate blocks.  The are much too restrictive.  People tend to omit
>comments and visual structuring when using blocks, because they don't
>have the flexibility to easily move stuff around when they have to
>go back and add something in the middle.

I don't agree.  Blocks (like everything else in Forth) require a different
approach.  The proper approach is, "When adding or factoring code,
USE A NEW BLOCK."

>I think blocks actually increase the average size of definitions, because
>you can't easily go back and factor out a plausible subdefinition, due
>to not having room to add the extra ": name  ( xx yy -- zz )  ;" and
>whatever commentary is appropriate.

Again, I don't agree.  See above.
-- 
Marc de Groot (KG6KF)         |"The all-American boy prefers beauty to brains
Noe Systems, San Francisco    | because he can see better than he can think."
UUCP: uunet!hoptoad!noe!marc  | -Farrah Fawcett
Internet: marc@kg6kf.AMPR.ORG |