On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 2:52 AM, Gregory Crosswhite <gcrosswhite@gmail.com> wrote:
On Nov 25, 2011, at 1:05 AM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
What are you talking about? There's *exactly* the same number of lines in a local function as there is with a class/namespace function. What am I missing?
Nothing, I think that I misread your argument as a general argument against long functions rather than against having non-trivial local functions within another function, which is why my response was off; my bad. In fairness you then responded to me by telling me a bunch of basic stuff about programming that I already know and practice as if I somehow must never have heard of these things before, merely because I said that I occasionally have longs function in my code that I don't go out of my way to break up out of a sense of dogmatism that they should never exist, so I'll call it even. :-)
Right, but as I explained too, in reasonably modern C++ code you wouldn't be needing to write these long functions precisely because it's not natural in a rich language like C++. Maybe if you were writing a program that needed to be a script but doing it in C++ then you'd end up with non-idiomatic solutions from a different frame of reference. So I guess it's really not even, more like you kinda missed the point I was making. ;) Cheers -- Dean Michael Berris http://goo.gl/CKCJX