by Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
May 4, 2008 at 01:57 PM
On 2008-05-04, Rod Dorman <rodd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> In article <FFQSj.209$KB3.87@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> Duke Normandin <dukeofperl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>On 2008-05-02, Rod Dorman <rodd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> ...
>>> The danger in using ****d references comes from assuming that the
>>> ****d indicator wont change when making subroutine or function
>>> calls. It might work fine when you write and test it but break at some
>>> point in the future if/when the subroutine is changed.
>>>
>>
>>So the most prudent course to take would seem to be to refrain from
>>using such potential booby-traps, would it not?
>
> The choice is yours. I find if you use ****d references only when the
> execution sequence is linear (i.e. no extrinsic function or subroutine
> calls) it isn't a problem.
You bet! Because the context of the ****d references is immediately
apparent because of its close proximity to the original global
variable.
> Note that this assumes you don't have a coding style that (shudder)
> includes GOTO Tag+Offset
Can't comment because I'm not there yet in the tutorial. I'll will keep
this in mind and experiment further when I get there. Thanks.
--
Duke Normandin
