Subj : Re: New Pico2 To : Lawrence D'Oliveiro From : Charlie Gibbs Date : Sun Aug 18 2024 23:11:23 On 2024-08-17, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On Wed, 14 Aug 2024 16:52:27 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > >> I soon gave up on punching sequence numbers in source decks. >> Our programs were subject to frequent modifications that required moving >> large blocks of code around, which meant that the sequence numbers >> became meaningless. > > This is why you didn’t have the sequence go up in steps of 1, but use > larger steps, like say 100. That made it easier to insert new cards with > in-between numbers. That definitely helps. But certain operations, e.g. re-factoring code, involve moving large blocks of code around. That's when things break down. Oh well, there's still the diagonal strip along the top of the deck - although that too gets messed up when moving large blocks of code. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | We'll go down in history as the \ / | first society that wouldn't save X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | itself because it wasn't cost- / \ if you read it the right way. | effective. -- Kurt Vonnegut --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3) .