The Problem with clc; clear; close all; ?
392 views (last 30 days)
A few days ago someone pointed out that using:
clc; clear; close all;
But does that really have to be the case?
clc: cleans up the command window and now one can work without getting confused with the commands for previous runs
clear: erases the variables from previous runs this will reduce chances of error in subsequent runs and the programmer does not have to worry about unnecessary trash variables.
close all: closes all currently open figures. This can be very helpful during subsequent runs of the same script. If the figure from the previous run has not been closed then the subsequent run will plot the data on the already open figure. Which of course is a total waste.
What is the problem with using these commands?
Rik on 17 Oct 2021
My main point is that people will get into the habit of using this, and will also use it in functions.
Clear is almost never needed in normal use, as you can use functions to keep your workspace clean. Close all should also be avoided, as you should use explicit handles to make your code robust. If there is an unexpected close all in a function, that will be annoying.
The big exception is during debugging. If you're using a script to quickly check something, these are fine. That is why all Image Analyst's demos start with it, and why you probably won't find any of them in his functions (with the possible exception of clc).