My introduction to "##"

peterchen

I think the best thing would be an Excel sheet (or similar) and a code generator that is included in the build process.

We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist

peterchen

You got something here! At a certain point, complexity can be moved around between "participants", but it remains in the project. "clipping components together" can increase complexity by one (thinking on a logarithmic scale) If your target is, however, still two or three orders of complexity away, you are in trouble. I think the idea is to plug together the next layer's "small, primitive classes" from the layer below. However, plugging components may give you the robustness of an application, but components have much higher requirements to be pluggable. At each layer, you spend more and more glue code to fit things together. It helps to start with a "more skilled", higher level language (i.e. start at higher complexity already, so the gap gets smaller), or apply KISS to the project goals (but that's not always possible). Hmmm... no solution, nope.

We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist

Pete OHanlon

Complexity does not necessarily contradict the KISS principle. Many problems are complex, but the constituent parts to the solution should be as simple as possible to solve the problem.

Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.

PIEBALDconsult

I'm now pondering storing the values in XML and using XSLT to create the h file. XSLT: the new C Preprocessor

Dan Neely

that'd be worthy of a fresh thread here in and of itself.

-- CleaKO The sad part about this instance is that none of the users ever said anything [about the problem]. Pete O`Hanlon Doesn't that just tell you everything you need to know about users?

peterchen

I actually wanted to do that as a project to "learn XML", but just the basics were such a bumpy ride that I contracted some kind of XML allergy. So if you do: A R T I C L E ! ;)

We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist

PIEBALDconsult

Correct you are, but should I? Or should it go in, perhaps, the XML/XSL forum? Or an article? Aw heck, here it is, you decide: state.xml

state.xsl

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<xsl:stylesheet version="1.0" xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform" >
<xsl:output omit-xml-declaration="yes" method="text"/>
<xsl:template match="/">
<xsl:for-each select="*">
typedef enum {
<xsl:for-each select="*">
<xsl:value-of select="../@Prefix"/><xsl:value-of select="name()"/>=<xsl:value-of select="."/>,
<xsl:if test="position()=last()"><xsl:value-of select="../@Prefix"/>LAST=<xsl:value-of select="last()"/></xsl:if>
</xsl:for-each>} <xsl:value-of select="name()"/>type ;
<xsl:value-of select="@Type"/>xsl:text </xsl:text><xsl:value-of select="name()"/>info[] = {
<xsl:for-each select="*">
<xsl:if test="position()!=1">,</xsl:if>{"<xsl:value-of select="../@Prefix"/><xsl:value-of select="name()"/>",0,0}
</xsl:for-each>}
</xsl:for-each>
</xsl:template>
</xsl:stylesheet>

result

  typedef enum {
  ST\_State1=0x01,
    ST\_State2=0x02,
    ST\_State3=0x03,
    ST\_LAST=3} statetype ;
  sometype stateinfo\[\] = {
  {"ST\_State1",0,0}
  ,{"ST\_State2",0,0}
  ,{"ST\_State3",0,0}
  }

As mentioned elsewhere, the counting of the entries in part two is unnecessary, but notice that here I set the value of ST_LAST to the number of entries.

PIEBALDconsult

Be careful what you ask for.

Dan Neely

I call a WTF!:laugh:

-- CleaKO The sad part about this instance is that none of the users ever said anything [about the problem]. Pete O`Hanlon Doesn't that just tell you everything you need to know about users?

Tristan Rhodes

From my experience, combining the smallest atomic parts together to create another simple atomic part is simply part of good system design. I've encountered HUGE function classes which have masses of dependancies on other stuff and it's a complete nightmare to figure out. At least with lots of small components you can black box at each level and the whole system becomes that much simpler to comprehend. T

------------------------------- Carrier Bags - 21st Century Tumbleweed.

PIEBALDconsult

What's your alternative of choice?

Anton Afanasyev

PIEBALDconsult wrote:

Be careful what you ask for.

I believe this actually is a case where he wants to get what he wishes for..

:badger:

PIEBALDconsult

(He's probably the only one.)

PIEBALDconsult

Wish granted, just submitted the article. (Now waiting for the tomatoes to start flying.)

peterchen

Waiting for it to appear...

We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist

KarstenK

This looks like "Security through obscurity" or the writer of this code wants to write such mess. If this is the style of the writer he ist a danger for the company.X|

Greetings from Germany

peterchen

:laugh: Yeah, maybe.

Agh! Reality! My Archnemesis![^]
| FoldWithUs! | sighist | WhoIncludes - Analyzing C++ include file hierarchy