One would assume that, but in practice, the predominant style is not one of many short procedures. Instead it feels that there's a preference to just inline the code unless the resulting procedure will have more than one caller.
Control structures are deeply nested and this goes on for 64 (very dense) lines. The low line count but is an artifact of how Oberon is conventionally formatted. When reformatted to mimic the conventions of languages like C, Java or Python it works out to more than 120 lines.
When I program in Oberon (recreationally) I tend to follow this style even though I would extract the same code into a separate method were I writing in Java.
For extra fun consider the German-Speaking word where CSV files are actually Semicolon-Separated but everyone still calls them CSV and looks at you like you drooled on yourself when you point out that “;” is not a “,”.
This appears to be because we use “,” as decimal separator and were too dense to learn how to use " properly in CSV.
When I wrote "teletype" I wasn't referring to what teletypes had become by the time by the time Unix was developed. Think further back than that. This is why I mentioned 5-bit codes:
This coding scheme is so constrained (32 possible 5-bit values) that it uses the codes FIGURES (01000) and LETTERS (10000) to toggle back and forth between two alternate sets of meanings for the remaining 30 possible codes. Still not enough space for lower case or ASCII's plethora of control codes (just NUL and DEL).
The early days of manual typewriters, paper tape, teletypes and vacuum tube systems, which already followed this practice predate US-ASCII, so I don't think the particular numeric values assigned by US-ASCII can have any explanatory power in answering this question.
Me, I blame the Romans ;-)
The Latin alphabet was initially only what we call the "upper case". What became the lower case came (a millennium?) later, first as an alternate style of handwriting and then as an addition to the alphabet along with rules about when which form of each letter should be used.
Given the need to economize as in 5-bit teletype codes it's not surprising the chosen convention was to print (or later display) those codes as upper case as that is, historically speaking, the default.
Still, I like to wonder if anyone every thought to build a teletype that printed in lowercase just to screw with people. :-D
Yes, facebook is blocking the creation of new posts with links to Dreamwidth. Or at least, they did so when I attempted to create a post containing a link to the post under discussion here about 5 minutes ago. I am located in Austria if that makes any difference.
For example, search for "PROCEDURE Scan" here: https://people.inf.ethz.ch/wirth/ProjectOberon/Sources/Texts...
Control structures are deeply nested and this goes on for 64 (very dense) lines. The low line count but is an artifact of how Oberon is conventionally formatted. When reformatted to mimic the conventions of languages like C, Java or Python it works out to more than 120 lines.
When I program in Oberon (recreationally) I tend to follow this style even though I would extract the same code into a separate method were I writing in Java.