Marco,
I see what you're saying, so I went and looked at some code fresh code I've
just written. I see that at its deepest, it goes 5 levels deep, which is
pretty close to what you've described. I also noticed something else:
In the cases where you could use CONTINUE, all of the ENDs are stacke
Since AD takes the accusative case, it's AD NAUSEAM
(I don't really want to argue JMP instructions, which is all there is once you
get to the compiled code.)
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
Clif,
I appreciated your viewpoint and was glad to see it. I didn't take it that you
were singling anyone out, but since I've not sallied forth into the fray,
perhaps I was immune from such feelings.
Thanks for your contributions as well as those who've made other constructive
offerings!
Sin
Sorry, Stuart. I should have completely trimmed the reply quote on my
post so it didn't look (as it apparently did) that I was singling out
you as the main target of my comments (after the part about guard
clauses). It was more of a sociological musing as to how many times
over the years we
requirements. Others may have
home-grown systems from the Jurrasic Pick era.
Without comparisons, we all function in a vacuum.
My 1 cent
Mark Johnson
- Original Message -
From: "Clifton Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007 10:55 PM
Subject: Re
.
- Original Message
From: David A Barrett
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Friday, 30
November, 2007 4:03:16 PM
Subject: Re: [U2] Deep and long indentations vs
multiple exit points
Curious, I would have done:
LOOP WHILE READNEXT ID
READ RECORD FROM FILE,ID THEN
One of the reasons I'm subscribed to the list because I'm interested to
see how other people do it their way. I've learnt some valuable stuff
here. I think contribution to this topic is valid under the banner of
technical discussion. But hey if I'm out of line or if the topic is not
applicable here
d helpers would
disappear. Plus, it would be that much more 'wordy' and hard to read
quickly.
My 1 cent
Mark Johnson
- Original Message -
From: "Trey Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007 8:43 PM
Subject: RE: [U2] Deep and long indentations v
ehalf Of Keith Johnson
(DSLWN)
Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007 5:59 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] Deep and long indentations vs multiple exit points
Dave Barret gave this code as an example:
GOSUB OPERATION.1
IF (NOT(ERROR)) THEN
GOSUB OPERAT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007 6:58 PM
Subject: RE: [U2] Deep and long indentations vs multiple exit points
> Dave Barret gave this code as an example:
>
> GOSUB OPERATION.1
> IF (NOT(ERROR)) THEN
> GOSUB OPERATION.2
> IF (NOT(ERROR)) T
Perhaps you might want to expand your search criteria to include "the
last ten years" and examine the use of Guard Clauses.
Does anyone else on the list find these discussions of "style," "good
practice," etc. to be both out-of-date and an exercise in wasted
bandwidth (not to mention having
, December 02, 2007 5:59 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] Deep and long indentations vs multiple exit points
Dave Barret gave this code as an example:
GOSUB OPERATION.1
IF (NOT(ERROR)) THEN
GOSUB OPERATION.2
IF (NOT(ERROR)) THEN
I'm in complete agreement with the "one way in/out" (OWI-OWO ) rule. Out
of interest, I have searched the net and of the many articles I found
which cited OWI-OWO, all cited it in the scope of being good practice. I
found one which cites "one way in, multiple|many ways out" with a
scathing comment.
Dave Barret gave this code as an example:
GOSUB OPERATION.1
IF (NOT(ERROR)) THEN
GOSUB OPERATION.2
IF (NOT(ERROR)) THEN
GOSUB OPERATION.3
IF (NOT(ERROR)) THEN
GOSUB OPEARTION.4
END
END
END
What
;Ken Wallis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2007 5:58 AM
Subject: RE: [U2] Deep and long indentations vs multiple exit points
> I realise that I've largely been a lurker of late - making a living
working
> with jBASE pretty much full time now - but I&#
up tight ;^)
Cheers,
Ken
-Original Message-
From: Marco Manyevere
Sent: Thursday, 29 November 2007 3:18 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: [U2] Deep and long indentations vs multiple exit points
There has been a lot said recently about styles, standards and good practic
use GOTO properly and can mix it with GOSUB and CALL for
readable code, I don't use RETURN TO.
My 1 cent
Mark Johnson
- Original Message -
From: "Susan Lynch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [U2] Deep and long indentations v
ianne Ackerman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 10:38 AM
Subject: Re: [U2] Deep and long indentations vs multiple exit points
> Mark,
> Although I usually agree with you, this time I have to disagree. Using
> a CASE statement in this way seems a very clear
Cordage Park Circle, Suite 200
Plymouth, MA 02360-7318
(508) 747-7261
- Original Message -
From: "Ray Wurlod" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: [U2] Deep and long indentations vs multiple exit points
A third possibility is
Mark,
Although I usually agree with you, this time I have to disagree. Using
a CASE statement in this way seems a very clear way to handle something,
especially when you're checking for a huge number of reasons to
"disqualify" something from happening. Have you ever programmed the
Federal Fi
>For my money, the CASE statement, sensibly used, is much better than
>multiple IF statements
Agreed. Let the compiler work it out.
Charles Shaffer
Senior Analyst
NTN-Bower Corporation
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.
Curious, I would have done:
LOOP WHILE READNEXT ID
READ RECORD FROM FILE,ID THEN
IF ((RECORD EQ COND1) AND (RECORD EQ COND2) AND
(RECORD EQ COND3)) THEN
RECORD = 'PROCESSED'
END
END
REPEAT
If I was worried about the IF statement getting too long, then I'd do this:
LOOP WHILE RE
someone coming from another non-MV
environment as END IF isn't MV required. I don't even know if it compiles.
- Original Message -
From: "Colin Jennings" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: [U2] Deep and long indentations v
You could do this.
PROCESS.REC:
READ RECORD FROM FILE,ID THEN
IF RECORD EQ COND1 AND RECORD EQ COND2 AND RECORD
EQ COND3 THEN
RECORD = 'PROCESSED'
WRITE RECORD TO FILE, ID
END IF
END IF
RETURN
Or, you could try:
READ RECORD FROM FILE,ID THEN
BEGIN CASE
CASE RE
Adrian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
11/29/2007 05:41 PM
Please respond to u2-users
To:
cc:
Subject: RE: [U2] Deep and long indentations vs multiple exit
points
But this is so much easier to read (note the liberal use of blank line
CTED] On Behalf Of Marco Manyevere
Sent: Friday, 30 November 2007 1:46 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] Deep and long indentations vs multiple exit points
I had to look up the "CONTINUE" statement. In 25 years I've never used
it, and don't even remember
A third possibility is to allow GOTO ERROREXIT (single exit point) - or even
RETURN TO ERROREXIT - in error handling code. This substantially reduces the
number of levels of indentation required.
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listse
My rule of thumb is that I should be able to see on the same page the
structure for IF/END, LOOP/REPEAT, READ/END, FOR/NEXT, etc. Otherwise the
block in between becomes a good candidate for a GOSUB.
Than see a
single case statement that ran across hundreds of lines of code.
I've also
done stuff l
I had to look up the "CONTINUE" statement. In 25 years I've never used
it,
and don't even remember seeing it used. Now I know what it does I think
it
should be banned.
I use CONTINUE all the time when processing
records that must meet multiple conditions in a loop. This way my code doesnt
loo
==
Pain is your body's way of saying, "Hey! Stop that!!"
===
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Womack, Adrian
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 5:52 PM
> To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
> Su
I'm very old school and learned my structured programming in PASCAL. The
cardinal rule is that you enter every block of code from the top, and you
exit it from the bottom.
No one ever got hurt doing this.
I can only remember one case in recent history where I actually used
mulitple exit points.
I much prefer the multiple exit point method, it makes the code a lot
easier to read.
Prime examples are when you are looping through a file but only want to
process certain records that pass a lot of conditions, it so much easier
to test each condition individually and then RETURN immediately.
S
I try as hard as possible to keep the subr's in the same order as they are
called (not always possible with conditions in the calling portion of the
program). Therefore someone just reading down the program can get a good
feeling for what's happening if that's the way they like to read it. I
*def
>I've seen programs that have 40 lines of main program code and
>99% of them are GOSUBs. That is just a horrible way to design an
>application, IMO.
That is interesting. I prefer the main routine to be a stack of well
named routine or function calls with minimal flow control and no detail. I
f
dnesday, November 28, 2007 12:31 PM
> To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
> Subject: RE: [U2] Deep and long indentations vs multiple exit points
>
> Subroutinize, subroutinize, subroutinize
>
> Flying geese should be avoided whenever possible. Those deep indents
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony Youngman
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 08:46
To: 'u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org'
Subject: RE: [U2] Deep and long indentations vs multiple exit points
I must admit I prefer multiple exit points, but I'll throw a third variant
28, 2007 10:18 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: [U2] Deep and long indentations vs multiple exit points
There has been a lot said recently about styles, standards and good
practice
and I wonder what your take is on deeply indented routines with a common
exit
point versus unindented
I like only one exit per subroutine. Deeply indented code can be minimized
by use of CASE statements and GOSUBs. Thus keeping readability and
enhancing maintainability.
Thanks,
David A. Green
www.dagconsulting.com
(480) 813-1725
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsub
RN
Cheers,
Wol
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marco Manyevere
Sent: 28 November 2007 16:18
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: [U2] Deep and long indentations vs multiple exit points
There has been a lot said recently about styles, sta
There has been a lot said recently about styles, standards and good practice
and I wonder what your take is on deeply indented routines with a common exit
point versus unindented routines but with multiple exit points. I almost
always prefer the later and find it much easier to follow. I come accro
40 matches
Mail list logo
