On Sat, 2 Mar 2002, Glen Goodwin wrote:
> Fred, what do you mean here? Too abstract, or not abstract enough? The
> code *is* portable, which requires an certain degree of abstraction.
> Please clarify -- thanks.
Entirely an issue of personal preference.
Consider three hypothetical forms of source code:
A: MOV AH, 2
MOV DL, 41h
INT 21h
B: MOV AH, 2 ; character display function
MOV DL, 'B'
INT 21h ; DOS API
C: MOV AH, DISPLAY
MOV DL, OURCHAR
INT DOSSERVICES
I prefer B, but there were a few cases where I felt that he was tending
towards C. (and plenty of times when I slip into writing A)
Abstraction is very useful and necessary for some types of portability.
But I don't like to have to go thorough a separate .H file to find out
what the code is that is being abstracted.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin_at_xenosoft.com
Received on Sat Mar 02 2002 - 12:22:41 GMT