Poll: Which type of branching do you prefer?
Line Numbers (i.e. GTO 150)
Labels (i.e. LBL A, GTO A)
Both
Neither
[Show Results]
 
Post Reply 
Keystroke Programming: Labels vs. Line Numbers
11-04-2014, 05:07 PM
Post: #5
RE: Keystroke Programming: Labels vs. Line Numbers
Labels, unless the number of labels is limited compared to the programming steps available.

That's one reason the 35S did labels and line numbers within labels (which idea I had a hand in, FWIW). The paradigm for single letter alpha labels could not be changed within the budgeted timeframe, but the suggestion of sightly modifying the GTO and XEQ instructions to allow for A003 as a destination could be done. The self-modifying nature of the code so that A003 would change to A004 in a GOTO if you added a step at A002, etc, was a suggestion I made that was readily adopted.

I believe it contributes greatly to using the 32K of ram much better than merely having 26 alpha labels would have.

Would expanded labels have been better than Label/StepNumber? Sure. As a compromise when that was not available, I believe still it was a very good choice.

All made very bad by the checksum bug which went unnoticed. I am really sorry to say that was right in front of some of us and we didn't notice it. For that, I really am still upset.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
RE: Keystroke Programming: Labels vs. Line Numbers - Gene - 11-04-2014 05:07 PM



User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)