You, as a person, are expecting it to follow indentation. The computer is following the numbers as typed, regardless of indentation.
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 2:59 PM, John McKown <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Farley, Peter x23353 < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> John, >> >> Confirmed. It seems to treat the out-of-sequence level number as just the >> next logical level down (i.e., treats level 12 just like level 15 after the >> preceding level 10). For this example code: >> >> > Thanks for testing that. I put in my "fix", but I did it by putting in the > "missing" level as a FILLER in what I _hoped_ was the proper place in the > code. That got it to compile in GNU COBOL. But the results of a "group > move" would not be equivalent, as best as I know of such things. I really > wonder if this is what IBM intended? I hope Mr. Ross of the COBOL > persuasion at IBM sees this thread and comments on it. Personally, I prefer > the GNU result. It just looks wrong to me. > > > -- > > Schrodinger's backup: The condition of any backup is unknown until a > restore is attempted. > > Yoda of Borg, we are. Futile, resistance is, yes. Assimilated, you will be. > > He's about as useful as a wax frying pan. > > 10 to the 12th power microphones = 1 Megaphone > > Maranatha! <>< > John McKown > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
