>>I agree with you, for an execution controller would be easier to debug like you show, even though I do not have that as a rule, myself. I may use IF This() AND That() AND TheOther() sometimes, when the functions involved in the statement take care of logging their own progress/result. Also, the code in his sample is pretty clear and not that difficult to re-factor into something like yours.
>>However, my comment to Thomas was about the naming convention, which may give the false impression that something is executed in a certain sequence. Similar in concept to the critique to the hungarian notation for variable names in foxpro.

>
>My point is, though, that any program that insists on function returns from 20+ functions all cryptically named, is bad in design to start with... No code we write should have all those dependencies..

Easy for you to say as you can look up the code in those methods - but OTOH there are situations, for instance building a dozen of stage tables before getting at the next step where that pattern is needed. And as a basic pattern template pattern is easy to understand and there you also have less correspondance of code with function name because of the abstraction given by a reused template pattern.