@geirove wrote:
Hello,
I think in general one should be less categoric when telling other people how top write "good programs". I have 20+ years of OO programming experience, and I also used to be very categoric in my early days. Later, one realizes, that every style / strategy may have its place.
I also use Stacked Sequences a lot, but only when initializing GUI (VI Front Panels): BUT; then again, my latest sytem, HPC-09 v6, www.objective.no/lean , has 30+ Front Panels.
@Lalox wrote:
Not so really bad using stacked sequences, I understand what you say, I use subVi's also but this kind of sequences helps for especific purposes and it is up to the programmer using them or not.
But now I have to ask, I use them but not abuse them, and I have no issues on my programing, so Do you know problems using this sequences bacause of Labview, not bad programers?
Thanks all of you, this was not an issue when i fist saw the bug list somo days ago.
geirove, look at what Lalox actually said. They pointed out there are specific purposes which are suited to a sequence structure. That's correct. They previously claimed they use them frequently. This is how we know it's poor programming style. The specific purposes aren't common. If they're using the sequence often, it's safe to say it's bad code.
You mention 20 years of OOP experience. If you're working with an OOP language for a large project, does it make sense to have a single class? Or, would you be better off abstracting things to make multiple classes so you could use the code in other projects you have? Does it make sense to use methods or should we keep ALL of the code in the main method and just copy/paste the code we want each time? Do either of these actually have a place in a well-written program?
There are things that are arguably bad. There are other things that are definitely bad and show a lack of understanding of the language. Ignoring functions/methods to put everything in main shows you don't really understand the language. Sure, you're accomplishing your task. But, you'll be better off if someone points out the value of functions and sets you on a better path. This is true with one day of experience or 20 years. When people point out it's a bad programming practice, they aren't insulting the programmer. We all started from a place of ignorance. We found a tool and learned to use it. Often, it's quicker to keep using that tool rather than learn to find the correct tool. 99% of the time, programmers are using sequence structures (of either type) because they don't understand dataflow. Understanding dataflow is paramount to using LabVIEW correctly. It's not categorizing to suggest they learn what makes LabVIEW work. I'd say it's detrimental to NOT point this out. Programmers should be interested in constant growth and learning new techniques. They shouldn't be afraid of code review. I'd much rather write a better program. Wouldn't you?
