Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cmcl2!lanl!jlg From: jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: The final word on GOTO (Don't I wis Message-ID: <14061@lanl.gov> Date: 2 Oct 89 17:36:57 GMT References: <1044@kim.misemi> Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory Lines: 13 From article <1044@kim.misemi>, by kim@kim.misemi (Kim Letkeman): > True. A big procedure is not necessarily badly structured. But that > does not make it easy to read. In fact, a procedure that grows beyond > your immediate field of view (24 lines on terminals, more on listings > and workstations) is *automatically* harder to read since you have > less context within your immediate grasp. Splitting some codes into several different routines may also be *automatically* harder to read. There is a difference between modularization and fragmentation. The line between varies according to the type of problem and the style of programming used. I have seen thousand line codes which were perfectly coherent. I have also seen 24 line code which should have been modularized.