2011/1/8 mattschinkel <[email protected]>:
> I think these libraries should be updated to save on cycles. I think
> this is better then readability in this case. I don't think anyone
> would have the need edit print.jal. If you want to keep readability,
> you can put the old print.jal at the bottom of the file commented out
> completely so someone may replace a procedure if needed.
>
Sorry to disagree on all of this.
- Everybody except you seem to be concerned about flash/ram/stack use.
- Bad readebility is bad for maintenance and means more bugs.
- Leaving old code is useless and overhead, but probably the least bad
idea of the above. One should add decent comment if code itself is not
obvious.

Joep

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"jallib" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en.

Reply via email to