More on "with" statement

[Roman Suzi]

On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Rufus V. Smith wrote:

>I went to the FAQ to check the entry about a "with" statement
>that is available in other languages.  I can only think of two
>reasons to use it.
>
>    1) You're a lazy typist. (Or haven't learned to cut and paste)
>
>    2) You are generally concerned that multiple references to the
>     same object with complex, multilevel access might be confusing
>    to the reader or not optimized by the compiler.

Programmers must be lazy to some degree. So, they tend to write

a*(b+c+d+e)

instead of

a*b+a*c+a*d+a*e

I think, the same applies to "with".

It is also better from maintainance point of view:
you have one point to change:

(a+1)*(b+c+d+e)

while:

(a+1)*b+(a+1)*c+(a+1)*d+(a+1)*e

However, with is a border case...

Sincerely yours, Roman Suzi
-- 
_/ Russia _/ Karelia _/ Petrozavodsk _/ rnd at onego.ru _/
_/ Friday, July 13, 2001 _/ Powered by Linux RedHat 6.2 _/
_/ "Useless Invention: Open Toed Safety Shoes." _/