Skeleton Subs are Useless?by OLPC (no login)One thing I see in the QB code here is Spaghetti code. If the programs get larger than about 300 - 500 lines, this will make them hard to follow, so for this, skeleton Subs are very useful. But I do not understand; if you are just porting QB code to C*, why do you need to manually handle memory allocation for Subs? from IP address 4.246.6.213 |
| Response Title | Author and Date |
| RE: Skeleton Subs are Useless? | on Feb 5 |
| * Shouldn't you pass the arrays Byref with pointers instead of duplicating them? ;-) | OLPC on Feb 5 |
| *I should, and I do. | on Feb 6 |
| Re: *I should, and I do. | LaananFisher on Feb 6 |
| QB 7.1 has a BYVAL statement, maybe QB64 could use that | qbguy on Feb 6 |
| RE: Actually a feature that I've always wanted is to be able to pass arrays byref or byval | on Feb 6 |
| Re: RE: Actually a feature that I've always wanted is to be able to pass arrays byref or byval | LaananFisher on Feb 7 |
| Since it is being programmed in C/C++, => | rpgfan3233 on Feb 7 |