|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
On Thu, 13 Dec 2001, multitrak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> I don't disagree with what you all have said. Makes one want to look
> outside EL (via DLL) to code more complex ideas using less archaic
> debugging tools.
>
> On a separate but related note, do custom variable or condition names other
> than Value1 or Condition1 add to the 64K code limit in TS4? The reason I
> ask is that I've seen system vendors use the built-in variable names when
> large code segments were involved. Is it a method to reduce code below the
> 64K limit, or just programmer laziness?
>
> MT
>
> >One of the many things I'm finding lacking with Omega's programs from
> >a system development viewpoint is the utter lack of any standard tools to
> >make all efforts easier; from the simpliest indicator to the most
> >complicated function. The disregard for integration into standard tools,
> >or the redevelopement of the same functionality, such as indent, RCS,
> >cflow, cperf, lint, and many others reduces what could be an extremely
> >fine tool to the equivilent of a big rock. A big rock is a great weapon
> >when your opponent has the same or less. When your opponent has a
> >repeating rifle, and knows how to use that rifle, then your hopes are
> >dashed on the same rock.
>
My guess from what I have seen within EL code is that all variables
consume part of th 64KB allocated to EL code. I feel the valueX and
conditionX are just more syntatic sugar.
Mike
|