If the windowing is used correctly there is no
reason why a system cannot go on "indefinitely"
processing "current" info. The idea is tie the
split date to the current date so that the window
"slides" along. However, knowing what commercial
programmers are like most will just do a dirty fix like
WindowStartDate:='1/1/1997' or such like. I hate
seeing numbers scattered through code obviously
such programmers miss the point of sticking
constants at the top of their source files or using
initialisation files. This style applies also to number
theoretical programs e.g. a "31" in one part of your
program may not be a "31" for the same reason as
a "31" in another part of the program - so why not call
the first "ELEVENTH_PRIME" and the second
"N_BITS_LESS_1" and declare them/calculate them
accordingly at the top of the code. The advantage being
that when you eventually get that 256 bit machine you have
always dreamed of you do not have to re-write you're whole
program ... catch my drift? Of course this does not work
if you've unravelled lots of loops for speed - but honestly
modern compilers should sort that one out for us or at
least provide some mechanism where by you can say
something like:
"function MyFunction(my_var); inline for my_var=1
to MY_CONST; ..."
I do not know if you can do this in C, I do not think it
is possible with Pascal compilers - if not it should be
made a feature of any serious compiler.
Thoughts?
----------------------------------------------------------
Daniel W. Grace
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
