Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uunet!bria!mike
From: mike@bria.UUCP (Michael Stefanik)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C common practice. (was: low level optimization)
Message-ID: <229@bria.UUCP>
Date: 28 Apr 91 09:16:35 GMT
References: <21964@lanl.gov> <15904@smoke.brl.mil> <22354@lanl.gov> <16815@chaph.usc.edu> <22636@lanl.gov>
Reply-To: uunet!bria!mike
Organization: MGI Group International, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 22

In an article, jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes:
>On the contrary.  Putting each C procedure into a separate file _is_
>common practice.  It is promoted as "good" style by C gurus.  Skilled
>C programmers recommend it - they don't avoid it or condemn it. 

Okay, I'll throw in my two pence.  As a general rule, splitting up
source into a gaggle of files is nauseating -- however, I have found
it to be useful when building a library.  Considering that I am using
a poor 'ol RT with it's brain-damaged C compiler, it is not in my
best interest to have it wade (slowly) through a large source file.
At best, it just takes a long time; at worst, it will choke and die.

Besides, this is all rather aesthetic; if a ton o' files that suck up half
the inodes on your machine give you a cheap thrill, why deny yourself?

Gotta love those Makefiles!

-- 
Michael Stefanik, MGI Inc, Los Angeles | Opinions stated are never realistic
Title of the week: Systems Engineer    | UUCP: ...!uunet!bria!mike
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If MS-DOS didn't exist, who would UNIX programmers have to make fun of?