Re: New parameter needed for a subprocedure

[Adam Glauser <adamglauser@xxxxxxxxx>]

David FOXWELL wrote:
> What exactly do you [Scott] meand by a stateless procedure. Do you mean that with my suggestion, the new procedure is dependant upon the fact that the old one was called first?
>
> With respect, nobody has really laid into my solution, so it can't be that bad, can it?

I wasn't able to tell for sure from your initial description whether you 
were planning to make the second procedure dependant upon the first by 
means of a global variable or something.  If that is the case, I think 
you'll find many of us will happily lay into your suggestion. :)

If you make one procedure rely on the operation of another, you are 
going to do great damage to the reusability and maintainability of the 
procedure.  If you like more detail about why, you should find lots of 
discussion by searching the list archive for "global variables" and/or 
"side effects".