Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
2004
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*November
*December
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 2004

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Another bizarre phenomenon

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg51625] Re: [mg51598] Another bizarre phenomenon
  • From: DrBob <drbob at bigfoot.com>
  • Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 23:42:11 -0400 (EDT)
  • References: <200410270553.BAA24479@smc.vnet.net>
  • Reply-to: drbob at bigfoot.com
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Don't use (* comments *). They're not worth all the problems they engender.

It's better to modularize the code so that it's self-explanatory and, when that's impossible, precede a Module with a text cell that describes the processing.

If you really want comments inside a Module, Block, or other compound statement, put them in quotes and delimit them with semicolons, like this:

Block[{a, b},
  "I'm gonna add a and b"; a+b
]

The "comment" is an expression like any other, but it doesn't do anything.

This approach may have speed and memory consequences (possibly), but they will be very slight.

Bobby

On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 01:53:58 -0400 (EDT), Steve Gray <stevebg at adelphia.net> wrote:

> I replaced a 3-letter symbol with another 3-letter symbol, looking at
> eachsearch and replacement. All seemed ok. Then I tried to execute the
> file and it went nuts. I somehow found that if I removed JUST ONE SPACE
> between the Module list of local symbols in a function definition line,
> and a comment on the same line, all was OK again.  Wow. This happened
> at least twice, identically. Any comments?
>
> Steve Gray
>
>
>
>



-- 
DrBob at bigfoot.com
www.eclecticdreams.net


  • Prev by Date: Re: Another bizarre phenomenon
  • Next by Date: Re: Bug in Graphics Text under Linux
  • Previous by thread: Re: Another bizarre phenomenon
  • Next by thread: Re: Another bizarre phenomenon