Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search

[REBOL] Re: Destroy no more useful functions

From: sunandadh:aol at: 17-Apr-2002 10:55

> Interesting. This is what I was thinking that recycle might do. I am > beginning to see more all the time that using objects can be very useful.
I didn't invent the idea of using an object to encapsulate functions -- I got it from someone on this list. And, truth-be-told, it would still be better if the mythical Rebol 3.0 implemented a proper module-model. But funcs-in-obs is a useful way to package an application. I tend to be writing largish applications (6,000-12,000 lines of code, with a couple of hundred functions). I tend to use this sort of template for where to put a function: appl-main.r -- the main guts of the application appl-init.r -- start-up, user-identification etc appl-rec.r -- error recovery and reporting appl-serv -- service functions (application-specific subroutines) appl-panels -- Vid panels appl-dd -- data definitions (data objects) appl-io -- (read/write/decrypt etc for most files) And then I have a few modules that are cross-application: debug.r -- useful debugging tools gui-utils -- VID functions (eg slider style) std-utils -- other useful functions (eg soundex, csv-->object etc) patches.r -- fixes to Rebol functions Deciding where to put a function is half the struggle in deciding if I need it at all. Sunanda.