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

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #47381

Re: How could have I factored this better?

Show all headers | View raw

"Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> Wrote in message:
> On 5/20/16 2:49 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
>> "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> writes:
>>> I don't see that the locals contributed anything. In fact, this is
>>> shorter, and avoids the need for code to manage the locals frame.
> 
> When you declare locals, a locals fram
> 
>> I'm not sure what you mean about "code to manage the locals frame" but
>> yeah, your version of solid-box-stars should work ok.  I'd take a little
>> issue with it only checking one of the args, since as you say, inputs
>> should be checked when they are supplied in the first place.  Therefore,
>> those checks have the nature of assertions, that signal that something
>> has gone expectedly wrong.  Checking just one of the args on the
>> observation that the other one is checked in another place in the code
>> is sort of ok since the other place is just 2 lines away.  But in
>> general, we put assertions in code because experience tells us that our
>> observations and reasoning aren't always reliable.  So if both of those
>> words have preconditions and we're into checking such things, it seems
>> ok to me to check in both places.
> 
> To me, the question of whether to check the row length in stars or 
> solid-box-stars depends on whether stars might be called from somewhere 
> else. If it's only used by solid-box-stars, I agree, both args should be 
> checked there. There's no point in checking twice, but there's no 
> guarantee that you mightn't find a use for stars elsewhere. In other 
> words, these decisions should be made in the context of the application 
> design, although that's hard to do with these little examples.
> 
> Cheers,
> Elizabeth
> 
> -- 
> ==================================================
> Elizabeth D. Rather   (US & Canada)   800-55-FORTH
> FORTH Inc.                         +1 310.999.6784
> 5959 West Century Blvd. Suite 700
> Los Angeles, CA 90045
> http://www.forth.com
> 
> "Forth-based products and Services for real-time
> applications since 1973."
> ==================================================
> 

Okay. Here's my factored version, using the suggests given:

: star  ( -- ) ." *" ;
: stars  ( n -- ) dup 1 < abort" value not a positive integer!" 0
 do star loop ;
: solid-box-stars ( column row -- ) dup 1 < abort" value not a
 positive integer!" 0 do dup cr stars loop drop ;

The reason I did 1 < because the problem in the book asked for a
 box of stars and 0 in either place wouldn't create a box shape of
 anything. For documentation purposes I should have broken up
 solid-box-stars to look like this?

: solid-box-stars ( column row -- ) dup 1 < abort" value not a
 positive integer!" 
                                                                  
       0 do dup cr stars loop drop ;

Just trying to learn good documentation and factoring as early as
 possible, so they will become habits by the time I start working
 on larger programs.  Thanks again for all of the suggestions and
 advice.

Take care now,
-- 
Darin Murphy


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

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

Thread

How could have I factored this better? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 13:09 -0700
  Re: How could have I factored this better? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 16:18 -0400
    Re: How could have I factored this better? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-20 10:25 -1000
      Re: How could have I factored this better? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 13:39 -0700
    Re: How could have I factored this better? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 21:33 -0400
  Re: How could have I factored this better? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-20 10:23 -1000
  Re: How could have I factored this better? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-20 15:44 -0700
    Re: How could have I factored this better? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-20 14:38 -1000
      Re: How could have I factored this better? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-20 17:49 -0700
        Re: How could have I factored this better? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-20 14:57 -1000
          Re: How could have I factored this better? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-20 18:34 -0700
            Re: How could have I factored this better? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-20 16:00 -1000
              Re: How could have I factored this better? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-20 20:08 -0700
                Re: How could have I factored this better? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-20 17:24 -1000
                Re: How could have I factored this better? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-21 18:15 -0700
            Re: How could have I factored this better? Albert van der Horst <albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2016-05-21 10:01 +0000
          Re: How could have I factored this better? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 22:15 -0400
            Re: How could have I factored this better? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-20 16:46 -1000
            Re: How could have I factored this better? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-21 18:36 -0700
              Re: How could have I factored this better? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2016-05-21 22:51 -0400
                Re: How could have I factored this better? hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2016-05-21 22:23 -0700
      Re: How could have I factored this better? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 22:43 -0400
    Re: How could have I factored this better? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2016-05-20 22:19 -0400
  Re: How could have I factored this better? "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-21 22:02 +0000
    Re: How could have I factored this better? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2016-05-21 22:30 -0400
      Re: How could have I factored this better? humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-05-21 19:40 -0700
  Re: How could have I factored this better? humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-05-21 19:38 -0700
    Re: How could have I factored this better? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2016-05-21 23:06 -0400
      Re: How could have I factored this better? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-21 20:59 -0700
        Re: How could have I factored this better? Darin Murphy <murphy.darin@gmail.com> - 2016-05-22 03:30 -0400
          Re: How could have I factored this better? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2016-05-21 23:14 -1000
  Re: How could have I factored this better? humptydumpty <ouatubi@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 03:54 -0700

csiph-web