Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #23982

Re: Program logic weirdness?

Show all headers | View raw

Den söndagen den 27:e april 2014 kl. 16:41:41 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse:
> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
> 
> 
> 
> > Den lördagen den 26:e april 2014 kl. 23:34:12 UTC+2 skrev Ben Bacarisse:
> 
> >> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
> 
> >> <snip>
> 
> >> > But that will still run a loop in each leg although technically only
> 
> >> > one loop required?
> 
> >> 
> 
> >> I tried to be clear, but if it isn't you are probably best off ignoring
> 
> >> what I wrote.
> 
> >> 
> 
> >> > Problem is if you have like fifty variables and
> 
> >> > fifty conditions it will craate alot of overhead?
> 
> >> 
> 
> >> I don't see why, but maybe I don't know what "overhead" means to you.
> 
> >> To me, a complex system with dozens of conditions controlling actions on
> 
> >> dozens of variables would be programmed quite differently, but the
> 
> >> emphasis would be on clarity.  It's going to be unreadable otherwise.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> 
> 
> > I think you are totally wrong Ben, we are basicly speaking about a
> 
> > print/write function, and if one should be able to steer what will be
> 
> > printout *before* one goes into the loop.
> 
> >
> 
> > Otherwise you will have to *fiddle* and doing unneccessary checks
> 
> > *within* loop.
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I suggested moving the test outside, but it does not fit for
> 
> every situation.  Your example was not clear on what the constraints
> 
> were so I could do no more that guess at a possible alternative.
> 
> 
> 
> > If you can not see this, you may still be a good programmer but i am
> 
> > sure any program language you developed would be *convoluted*.
> 
> 
> 
> That's kind of you, not!
> 
> 
> 
> > Ben when you print out something in a loop, and there is 50 conditions
> 
> > *on printouts* that is clear set before starting print/write, you do
> 
> > not want to create a separate function for each or create a loop leg
> 
> > for each?
> 
> 
> 
> No I don't (and I hope it did not seem like I was suggesting that).  The
> 
> trouble with vague descriptions like "50 conditions" is that it matters
> 
> what they are and what they control.  My suggestion was based on a
> 
> guess, which in turn was based on your example with a single condition.
> 
> 
> 
> > It could be so simple that the IF clause are named (could be named and
> 
> > unnamed) ifA ifB ifAA and so on and have a boolean flag. The default
> 
> > could be set to false the condition is not fullfilled, but you are
> 
> > able to set the boolean flag to true. The if statement already
> 
> > fullfilled no need to check again.
> 
> 
> 
> There are ways to do that in conventional programming languages but they
> 
> will all be unacceptable to you.
> 
> 
> 
> > Rather then looping and checking 50 *unnecessary* conditions for each
> 
> > round of loop printing out millions of values. No and i do not prefer
> 
> > 50 loops running in 50 functions.
> 
> 
> 
> Which no one has suggested.  50 function call might, however, be a
> 
> reasonable solution (remember, the designers of ECMAScript have omitted
> 
> the feature you want, so you must make do with what they did think of
> 
> providing).
> 
> 
> 
> > I prefer a simple boolean switch upon the if clause, and it is a
> 
> > mystery that i do not know any programming that can handle such a
> 
> > simple task.
> 
> 
> 
> I used to think that all the time.  Every time I came across a
> 
> programming pattern that was not supported directly by the language I
> 
> was using that day, I thought, "what Fortran, SASL, LISP, BCPL, Algol
> 
> 68, Snobol (or whatever) needs is feature X or Y or Z".  Sometimes
> 
> that's the right thought, and sometimes it isn't.  It's surprisingly
> 
> hard to know when it is and when it isn't.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Ben.

I could surprise you with my cobol skills ;D

Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Program logic weirdness? jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2014-04-25 22:53 -0700
  Re: Program logic weirdness? jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2014-04-25 22:57 -0700
    Re: Program logic weirdness? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-04-26 12:35 +0100
      Re: Program logic weirdness? jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2014-04-26 07:59 -0700
        Re: Program logic weirdness? jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2014-04-26 08:11 -0700
        Re: Program logic weirdness? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-04-26 22:34 +0100
          Re: Program logic weirdness? jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2014-04-27 00:44 -0700
            Re: Program logic weirdness? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-04-27 13:20 +0100
              Re: Program logic weirdness? jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2014-04-27 06:09 -0700
                Re: Program logic weirdness? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-04-27 18:30 +0100
                Re: Program logic weirdness? jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2014-04-27 12:13 -0700
                Re: Program logic weirdness? jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2014-04-28 02:33 -0700
              Re: Program logic weirdness? jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2014-04-27 06:25 -0700
              Re: Program logic weirdness? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2014-04-27 14:55 +0000
            Re: Program logic weirdness? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-04-27 15:41 +0100
              Re: Program logic weirdness? jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2014-04-27 13:57 -0700
  Re: Program logic weirdness? jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2014-04-25 23:18 -0700
  Re: Program logic weirdness? jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2014-04-25 23:23 -0700
  Re: Program logic weirdness? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-04-26 15:06 +0200
    Re: Program logic weirdness? jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2014-04-26 08:00 -0700
    Re: Program logic weirdness? jonas.thornvall@gmail.com - 2014-04-26 08:06 -0700

csiph-web