On Tue, 1 Oct 2013 11:50:51 -0400, John Gilmore wrote: >The PL/I leave statement is very different from the C continue and that ilk. > But perhaps slightly less different from the C "break".
>Paul Gilmartin will object to these [and other] uses of labels, but >they are in fact innocuous. > But what if I don't? I certainly prefer LEAVE to GOTO (less spaghetti- prone, but it might be clearer if the label were at the end of the block rather then the beginning). And I'd hate to see LEAVE <number of relative nesting levels>. Does PL/I have a scheme to check matching of DO with END by requiring that if both are labelled the labels match? Rexx has something like this, but the syntax is cumbersome and the enforcement is sporadic. (I am unsympathetic to the argument that careful indention is a suitable alternative.) It's unforgivable that JCL doesn't enforce matching of labels on IF, ELSE, and ENDIF; even worse that the specification requires (suggests?) that they be distinct if non-blank, but the implementation doesn't enforce that. I hate JCL! -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
