On Apr 30, 2007, at 7:10 PM, Tim Hare wrote:
> Andy Dent wrote
>>
>> Quoting Thom McGrath <lists at thezaz dot com>:
>>
>>> Just curious, why is this considered a warning? Is there some
>>> kind of
>>> overhead that I missed, or is it just messy code.
>>
>>> On Apr 30, 2007, at 4:48 PM, Brendan Murphy wrote:
>>>
>>>> and the second is to check for misplaced
>>>> DIM statements (DIMs imbedded within blocks of code)
>>
>> Now that it is available (I moved up from 5.5 a few months ago), I
>> quite frequently use it to guarantee scope of variables.
>
> Note, however, that there is overhead associated with DIM in that it
> initializes the variable; it isn't purely a scope thing. Dimming a
> variable
> inside a loop will add overhead to the loop and should be treated
> in the
> same way as other loop invariants - move them outside the loop.
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.
Tim
--
Tim Jones
tjmac at tolisgroup dot com
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
|