On May 1, 2007, at 10:50 AM, Brendan Murphy wrote: > Thom McGrath wrote: >> Just curious, why is this considered a warning? Is there some kind of >> overhead that I missed, or is it just messy code. > > Tim Jones wrote: >> But ... Brendan's check is for ANY block of code. I very oftne place >> DIM's inside of If - Then blocks as they are not needed if the If >> goes one way rather than another. This is a very valid use and does >> not incur the issue you mention of DIMing within a loop. > > Thom McGrath then wrote: >> I get the point now. I'm so used to optimizing my loops that I didn't >> consider somebody would actually put a dim inside a for-next loop. >> >> So really, this should be checking for dims inside loops, rather than >> every block. > > This whole discussion misses the point. Maintenance of the code > "trumps" all the merits of putting DIM statements in any > other place but the top of the method since putting DIM statements > within the code are negligible at best. If you scatter your DIM > statements within your code you make your code harder to read. > Which is more important, your time as a developer or some > negligible benefit? If your time is only worth $1 an hour, then > have at it an write unmaintainable code, but the professional > developers typically earns $50 or more an hour and making your > code harder to read is rather short sighted.
I disagree. I use block-scoped dim statements all the time. In addition to the points raised by Glenn and Joe, I'll add a third -- block scoping is a form of information hiding that imposes a useful discipline on design. Charles Yeomans _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
