On 23 Apr 2012 10:21:03 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
>Gord,
>
>Not quite.
If IBM had implemented the EXIT enhancements in the 2002 standard we
would have available
EXIT PERFORM (for inline PERFORMs which are like DO loops)
EXIT PERFORM CYCLE which allows iteration without having to do
unnatural things in the code
EXIT PARAGRAPH
EXIT SECTION.
I know I could have used them. Unfortunately many companies seem
stuck on coding standards last updated for COBOL VS.
Clark Morris
>
>PL/I is the archetypical; language that makes these facilities
>available, and in it the label associated with a leave statement can
>only be that of a containing group, as in
>
>outer: do ;
> inner: do ;
> . . .
> leave outer :
> . . .
> end inner :
>end outer ;
>
>in which execution of the leave statement transfers control to the
>statement following the
>
>end outer ;
>
>statement.
>
>The GOTO I described transfers control to the statement following the
>instance of a label associated with the first invocation of a
>procedure from the invocation of that procedure in which it is
>executed.
>
>Note that PL/I can do this. If you supply a label constant, call it
>gubbins, to a procedure as an argument and then, within that
>invocation or a subsequent, recursive invocation of this procedure
>execute the statement
>
>goto gubbins ;
>
>control will be returned to the instance of the label gubbins active
>at the time of the first call,he DSA stack weill be purged
>appropriately, etc., etc..
>
>John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
