Well I think you are right - there would be better ways to split out segments of the script, and if I find more than one routine neededing to do the same things, I go to the effort of doing it. However at the moment, I am mainly concerned with converting HyperCard scripts to Rev, and so I like to change as little as possible, to make sure I don't mess anything up.
Cheers, Sarah On 3/21/06, Geoff Canyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Do you have an example? I agree that if you end up passing in a > handful of arguments by reference, you haven't accomplished much by > breaking out the routine. The question is if there isn't a better way > to slice the routine, where that wouldn't be necessary. > > On Mar 20, 2006, at 4:29 AM, Sarah Reichelt wrote: > > > In my experience, it's probably due to never passing values by > > reference. If I am working on a routine that generates multiple > > variables, then acts on them, it is easier to keep it all together > > than to try and transfer more than one variable back & forth between > > handlers & functions. > > > > A separate function is great if it only has to return one variable, > > but as soon as it acts on more than one, I find it easier to leave > > that code as part of the main handler. > > > > Of course, if a segment of code is used by more than one handler, it's > > worth the effort to split it out, but otherwise, I'm not too fussed > > about keeping handlers small. Good commenting can overcome any > > problems interpreting it later :-) > > _______________________________________________ > use-revolution mailing list > [email protected] > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription > preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution > _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
