Question

What was the original reason for MATLAB’s one (primary) function = one file, and why is it still so, after so many years of development?

What are the advantages of this approach, compared to its disadvantages (people put too many things in functions and scripts, when they should obviously be separated … resulting in loss of code clarity)?

Answer 1

Matlab’s schema of loading one class/function per file seems to match Java’s choice in this matter. I am betting that there were other technical reasons for speeding up the parser in when it was introduced the 1980’s. This schema was chosen by Java to discourage extremely large files with everything stuffed inside, which has been the primary argument for any language I’ve seen using one-file class symantics.

However, forcing one class per file semantics doesn’t stop mega files — KPIB is a perfect example of a complicated, horrifically long function/class file (though a quite useful maga file). So the one class file system is a way of trying to make the user aware about code abstraction more than a functionally useful mechanism.

A positive result of the one function/class file system of Matlab is that it’s very easy to know what functions are available at a quick glance of a project directory. Additionally many of the names had to be made descriptive enough to differentiate them from other files, so naming as a minor form of documentation is present as a side effect.

In the end I don’t think there are strong arguments for or against one file classes as it’s usually just a minor semantically change to go from onw to the other (unless your code is in a horribly unorganized state… in which case you should be shamed into fixing it).

EDIT!

I fixed the bad reference to Matlab adopting Java’s one class file system — after more research it appears that both developers adopted this style independently (or rather didn’t specify that the other language influenced their decision). This is especially true since Matlab didn’t bundle Java until 2000.