Cool, I guess that there is no "one" correct answer but more a
question of style & experience,
the separation of logic & code mangling into two parts makes the most
sense to me.
Ill continue to sharp my macro foo ;)
On Aug 30, 8:16 pm, Vagif Verdi wrote:
> I would argue that macros always shou
I would argue that macros always should be syntax wrappers for
functions. Coding the logic into a macro in most cases is a mistake.
So first write the function that does the work. Then write a macro
that simplifies a syntax to call that function.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~--
On Aug 29, 3:48 pm, ronen wrote:
> In a lot of cases its seems that macros are used even when a function
> can do the same task,
> Macros seems to be less readable than their functional counterparts &
> more complex to write (to me at least).
>
> Its clear that there are special cases in which
Hi,
Am 29.08.2009 um 21:48 schrieb ronen:
In a lot of cases its seems that macros are used even when a function
can do the same task,
Macros seems to be less readable than their functional counterparts &
more complex to write (to me at least).
Its clear that there are special cases in which ma
In a lot of cases its seems that macros are used even when a function
can do the same task,
Macros seems to be less readable than their functional counterparts &
more complex to write (to me at least).
Its clear that there are special cases in which macros are the perfect
solution (like partial e
