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.