On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:17 AM, John Mattson <[email protected]> wrote:
> It may be uncharitable of me, but perhaps you are talking about how to the > job well, and the programmer is talking about his/her job security. Create > something hard enough to maintain, and your job security is pretty much > assured. Reference the "programming standards" article in the recent > submission to this very list. > Perhaps true. I gave the programmer something (untested) and he'll look at it "when he gets the time". He also said that, should it be considered, the MicroFocus conversion team (people actually from MicroFocus) will be asked about it. I won't say that my code is necessarily easy to understand or maintain. I use reference modification to treat a PIC X(...) variable as if it were an array of bytes. And I use that along with an INSPECT verb to (1) find the next blank & (2) find the next non-blanks after that blank in order to find the "start" and "end" of a string of blanks - which I then compress using a really ugly RLE sequence (which I did not invent). I did _heavily_ comment what I was trying to do. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- Heisenberg may have been here. http://xkcd.com/1770/ Maranatha! <>< John McKown ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
