On Friday, October 25, 2002, at 05:34 PM, TM Lutas wrote:
This seems to be going one way. Is there any reason not to put
something in a module?
Encapsulation. Placing application-specific, non-reusable code in the
Application class is more OOP than using modules. Methods and
properties of the Application class exist in their own namespace
reducing the chances of name conflicts.
On the other hand, modules come in handy when you want to create
libraries of common functions that you will use in many programs. For
instance, I have a module containing often-used string handling
functions and another for file handling. Modules are also important if
you want to define global constants. (I don't like defining constants
in properties because it introduces the possibility of inadvertently
changing the value, thus producing a hard-to-find bug.) Methods
executed from modules also tend to be slightly faster than those in
classes, but this is only apparent when calling functions many
thousands of times. And the execution speed is also affected by where
you call the function from so, your mileage may vary.
Bob
---
A searchable archive of this list is available at:
<http://dbserver.realsoftware.com/KBDB/search.php>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:realbasic-betas-off at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:realbasic-betas-digest at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
.
|