🚀 go-pugleaf

I have been considering an idea to include the source to library
functions in the header files.  The SOURCE macro would control whether
the file is compiled for the library or as a header file.

I am almost ready to give up on the idea, but thought I would give the
net community a chance to talk me back into it.  The main pro argument
is that the function prototypes need not be duplicated in both the
source and he header file.  They can be specified using the portable.h
package I have been distributing, such that the same statement both
defines the function and declares the interface.

There are two con arguments.  One is an issue of software engineering
and the other is a techical detail in the implementation.  One user
argued that header files should be reserved for interfaces, hiding the
details of implementation from the user.  That would prevent the
programmer from making assumptions in his code based on the details
revealed in the source.

The other con argument regards the complexity of compilation.  The
SOURCE macro must be defined after the header file is included.  If
this is not done properly, then major problems could ensue.  Also, the
TEST variable cannot be used, because other programs using these
header files would cause the library routine's test code to be
generated.  There is probably a workaround, at worst defining a
separate PACKAGE-NAME_TEST variable for each header file.

As I indicated, I have nearly given up on the idea, and will only
continue the practice if I get resounding affirmation from the net.
-David-

# david@wubios.wustl.edu             ^     Mr. David J. Camp            #
# david%wubios@wugate.wustl.edu    < * >   +1 314 382 0584              #
# ...!uunet!wugate!wubios!david      v     "God loves material things." #
# abs (investment#1 - investment#2) << abs (anyinvestment - anydebt)    #