Here's a tip: If you are starting a project that is likely to grow to any reasonable size, group all your global variables into one (or several) global *structure* variables. The disadvantage of adding "myvar\..." all over the place is far outweighed by avoiding having to hunt down bugs because you forget you are already using a global variable elsewhere. Which leads to my request: PB would be more managable if in procedures it supported true "Local" variables which do not effect any global use of same named variables. Add a "static" option to preserve values between calls and now you don't even have to worry about clashing with global variables.
@Fred: I'm sure you know exactly what I am requesting without all the above. The description is for the benefit of others who may not have come across these options in other languages.
"Local" and "Local Static" Variables
Re several files: my current project is split into about 16 files. Yes, your suggestion would be useful but I suspect PB would end up having to support name spaces. I'd settle for "local" and "local static" for now... oh and a debugger that actually worked across multiple files. Now that would be a time saver! 
Local already exists: it's 'Protected'. About Static, it will be implemented very soon as it's really needed.
GPI: the idea to make file only scope variables is interesting, it would allow to do JAVA like package feature.
May be something like this:
Of course you could put the same Package word in several files, so it will allow to shared global variable trough files too. Just a tough..
GPI: the idea to make file only scope variables is interesting, it would allow to do JAVA like package feature.
May be something like this:
Code: Select all
Global a,b ; a and b are global everywhere
Package Mod1
Global a,b ; Global only in the Package Mod1 and very global values aren't modified at all
Package Mod2
Global e,f ; Global only in the Package Mod2