In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
on 01/19/2006
at 02:58 AM, Rob Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Earlier in this thread you criticized the practice of using "address
>env buffer" each time as being inefficient.
Not that I recall; I criticized doing *both* and address env *and*
doing address env buffer as inefficient.
>I think you are nitpicking here
One man's nit is another man's ABEND.
>perhaps I should have used "address
>statement execution" instead of "call"
But the reference to PUSH/POP would still have been incorrect.
>The PUSH/POP method is used to maintain the address environment
>between executions of the "address env buffer" statement.
What PUSH/POP method and why do you need to "maintain" an environment
that doesn't change?
>I can appreciate that some coding techniques appeal to some whilst
>not to others - if this is just such a case then so be it and we can
>each agree to stick with our own gods.
As long as I don't inherit it, I don't mind how cluttered your code
gets.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
