Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!elroy!jato!randy
From: randy@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Randy Hammock)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: To macro, or not to macro?  (LONG) ... a programming style.
Message-ID: <1333@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov>
Date: 12 Jun 89 04:55:44 GMT
References: <2454@van-bc.UUCP> <19191@cup.portal.com> <10197@watcgl.waterloo.edu> <19353@cup.portal.com>
Reply-To: randy@jato.UUCP (Randy Hammock)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Lines: 15

It has been my experience that a good set of macros (in any language) has
a tendency to make code more readable and easier to understand.  A project
that I worked on a few years ago had a set of "structuring" macro for our
assembler.  Can you imagine writing jump-less assembler code.  True, the
macros instered the jumps for you but you did not have think up all the
silly label name every time you had to jump around a couple of lines of
code.  We had macros that provided: loop-until, loop-while, select-case,
doif-andif-elseif.  They could even be nested 10 deep!  Remeber, if used
improperly, macros can also obfuscate code, too.

-- 
      /// |   randy@jato.jpl.nasa.gov  Telos - Jet Propulsion Laboratory - NASA
AMIGA///  | hammock@mars.jpl.nasa.gov  ** Voyager II at Neptune August 1989 **
 \\\///   |--------------------------------------------------------------------
  \XX/    | "If I wanted your opinions, I'd have given them to you!" - Mock