From: do-not-use@swldwa.uk
On 30/10/2025 19:46, albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl wrote:
> In article <10e03fr$3qgk5$1@dont-email.me>,
> Gerry Jackson wrote:
>> On 26/10/2025 23:54, dxf wrote:
>>> On 27/10/2025 1:10 am, Gerry Jackson wrote:
>
>
>>
>
Wow, what a lot of advice, some good, some irrelevant. I get the
impression that you saw that I was using [ELSE] for multi-line comments
and that I had included the comment code definitions in with the
conditional code definitions (done for convenience). Then you jumped to
the conclusion that I was mixing application executable conditional
compilation with comments without looking at the code in detail.
No mixing of the two is involved. I am simply re-using an existing word,
[ELSE], which is, therefore, more of a general purpose word that skips
words in the input stream, it could be called, say, SKIP-WORDS which is
then redefined [ELSE] or [COMMENT] as appropriate either by colon
definition or by SYNONYM.
> Long story short
> - never use nested conditional compilation
Why, occasionally it's useful. Never say never.
> - use [THEN] not [then] , it is a string and there is no
> mention that it is caseinsenstive.
I fail to see your point, all forth names are strings. Case
insensitivity or not is a personal preference.
> - use conditional compilation for straight code, never mix
> it with comment
That depends on what you mean by mix and how much. I see little harm in
\ or ( comments
> and certainly don't mix it with invented
> comments ( DOC ... ENDDOC , (* *) , \\ , '\* .. *\ )
Why? I don't understand why you shouldn't use meaningful names for a
block of comment
> - never comment out conditional compilation.
Why? I've shown that it can be done using \, that means that any use of
[IF] etc in the rest of the comment line is not executed
--
Gerry
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
