Re: State machines and Goto's (was Re: Should internet support software be written in Ada?)

[wjwinn@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com (Bill Winn)]

In article <fjm.84.000D0007@ti.com>, fjm@ti.com communicates...

>And what if the common code is (relatively) large and using a (relatively) 
>large number of the variables used by the procedure that it is already in 
and 
>needs them to have the values which they have at the point where the 
>'repeated' code occurs?  Presumably you propose writing a function or 
>procedure with 15-20 parameters?  I don't consider that particularly good 
>practice.
>
>
<step on soapbox>

If you need to send 15-20 parameters to a function I would say that your 
function is probably not sufficiently narrow in scope.  According to most 
good software engineering principles that I have seen, a function should do 
*1* thing, do it well, and move on (thank you Charles Winchester III).  
Therefore, I would first look at the problem and see if the best abstraction 
has been choosen.  A function with 15-20 paramters has probably not been 
properly abstracted.

For the sake of argument let us assume that one has properly abstracted the 
problem and found that:  (1) 15-20 data are needed for the function; and (2) 
it makes no sense to split the function into smaller functions (this is a 
stretch, but stick with me).  In this case I would suggest that one could 
use accessor routines to the needed data, rather than passing all data as 
parameters.  This would:  (1) help support encapsulation of the required 
data elements; (2) avoid nasty interfaces; and (3) avoid global data (my CS 
degree requires me to say this!).

<step off soapbox>


Bill Winn
Software Engineer - Analysts International Corporation
-------------------------------
wjwinn@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com

My views do not express the views of anyone except my alter-ego.