Just to keep things in perspective, this topic was discussed earlier under [Jgeneral] Transformational Multiline Functions http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/general/2006-December/028252.html
The proposed "muldef" yields definitions which are both readable and nicely debuggable. --- "Sherlock, Ric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks for the dyad example and yes stored procedures might be a good > idea but I'm using SQLite via Oleg's package and that doesn't support > stored procedures. Bjorn, in my second (fuller) post on the subject I > discounted appending to the line over multiple lines. I don't know about > you but I find it tedious & messy (and much harder to copy/paste ;-) ) > > I think the "keep it simple" advice I've had from a number of people is > probably pretty sound, so will probably go that way for now. > > Being quite new to J I'm not really sure how important it is for the > debugger to handle this sort of case (especially the anonymous), vs > coming up with a way of allowing nesting. Would this be useful in more > general cases, or would finding some way to allow nesting, render it a > non-issue? > To me, allowing nesting seems simpler and would result in more readable > code, but I'm sure I'm not aware of all the issues. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Miller, Raul D > Sent: Thursday, 15 February 2007 01:39 > To: Programming forum > Subject: RE: [Jprogramming] Possible to nest > multilinenoundefinitionwithinverb definition? > > Dan Bron wrote: > > I would warn you away from this pattern if you use or intend to use > > the J debugging facilities. The dyad within the monad GetPrice is > > anonymous, and consequently atomic from the J debugger's POV; hence > > undebuggable. > > I consider this a defect in the debugger, and refuse to let it impact my > code. > > Note that this defect also matters for code like: > > verba=:3 :0"1 > > or > > verbb=:3 :0&.> > > etc. > > When I need to use that aspect of the debugger to isolate a problem with > my code, I'm already in a position where I need to be re-writing my > code. And the debugger will tell me which specific function is having > the problem. So, in that case, I first rewrite the function to make the > debugger happy with it, and then use the debugger to find the flaw, and > then I fix the problem, test some more, and quite probably rewrite some > more based on the outcome of my testing. > > But you're right that this issue does warrant an occasional warning. > > Finally note that for SQL, I prefer using stored procedures over inline > code. There are times when I can't (mysql doesn't support stored > procedures), so sometimes I have to make allowences there, too. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Have a burning question? Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
