From: Daniel J S. <dan...@ie...> - 2004-07-11 01:58:14
|
Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote: >On Sat, 10 Jul 2004, Daniel J Sebald wrote: > > > >>Ethan A Merritt wrote: >> >> >> >>>For what it's worth - >>>After I apply the with-image patch df_readline contains 653 lines of >>>code, of which only 303 are shared by the two modes. >>> >>>The largest block of shared code is the section (lines 3362-3465) >>>checking for blank lines, skipped lines, and EOF. Is this even relevant >>>to binary mode? >>> >>> >>> >>That's correct. But my point is that they do pretty much similar >>things, i.e., loading the variables to prepare the next stage of the >>code that determines where to reroute them. >> >> > >Well, achieving the same goal is not the same thing as doing the same job, >and thus doesn't call for having the two routines combined. I tend to >agree with Ethan here: if they share so little actual code, they had >better be in separate routines, and the common code broken out into >a common subroutine. > Right. They are not intermixed in a convoluted fashion. If I recall, there is an if statement "if (df_general_binary)" that pretty much breaks things into two chunks of code that easily could be put into separate routines. The point is I didn't want to upset the apple cart too much, by creating all kinds of new subroutines and the like... I still make the point that higher level plot{23}d.c routines should hot have to know whether the file is binary or ascii, so there should still just be "df_readlin()" from that perspective. A much cleaner and organized "df_readline()" is a different matter. Dan |