On Sat, 2005-05-28 at 00:59 -0400, Daniel Carrera wrote: > Rod Engelsman wrote: > > > Just to play devil's advocate here...
The devil is in the detail :-) > So... back to your question. Just lumping Word, Excel and Outlook as one > program would be a really bad idea. But if you could significantly > reduce the code size by having them share components that they have in > common, that would be a good idea. And this is what OOo does. Yes its a trade off between shared code which tends towards monolithic and modularity for individual functions. Really the more often something is used the more important it is that the routines are efficiently coded. Eg putting a character on a screen is probably used by virtually every app, so it should not be necessary to write that routine every time a new app is created. Just go to the routine and call it with the appropriate parameters. I once designed an intelligent seismometer from a data logger. I think the new code was about 100 bytes. Basically things like a software routine for a 100 microsecond resolution timer were built into the device so it was JSR <Address> <parameter> (Jump to sub-routine and go round it enought times to take up so much time) and hope that who ever wrote the timer was not a dodgy casio watch designer :-) So most of the program was simply using stuff already built in. -- Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ZMSL
