Re: Program structures

[Joep Beckeringh <joep@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Steve,

In our company we use program templates, with a lot of standard subroutines. 
Many subroutines are empty in the template, but when programmers build a program 
based on a template, they know (or should know) where to put the extra code. 
When they make changes to existing programs, they recognise the structure of the 
program. So if you removed empty subroutines in one of our programs, you would 
not be making yourself very popular.

Joep Beckeringh


Raby, Steve (GE Advanced Materials, consultant) wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I have just spent hours cursing and swearing and trying to get a program to work properly, I made a small change regarding a call from another program. This program I now curse and condemn to hell for eternity was written in the style of a case tool, in the style of not by. That is the mainline consists of a number of CASEQ and EXSR statements, these then lead to, obviously, subroutines, but some of these subroutines just contain one line, like SETON LR and Chain. They are almost impossible to debug if you want to step thru line by line. Is it just the Netherlands where these are written? I never came across this in the UK, the last company I worked in here in NL one guy was constantly trying to get me to write my programs in this style, he convinced my non-techie manager that it was the way to go too. Now here I have found at least three other "programmers" suffer from this, have I missed something? Is this the new thing? Or am I just being over critical?  Now I go to try
a!
>  nd finish this damn thing off, maybe I should just re-write the damn thing?
>
> Steve
>
> Steve Raby
> GEP Contractor (Mulix)
> ___________________________________________________
> LNP Engineering Plastics            Tel. +31 162 587684 
> Ottergeerde 22-28                    Fax  +31 162 521924
> 4941VM   Raamsdonksveer    Mobile +31 620 542063
>                                             Mail : steve.raby@xxxxxxxxxxxx