I wasn't just referring to flavors/implementations of PICK, but I also do a lot of cross language pick, perl, javascript, php, vb, java, etc I hate having to remember whether I can use a ++ or ++= or =++ or whatever. It's funny, I'll use x=x+1 because it always works, and almost always, someone will say, "you know....you could use .... instead" - sometimes its easier to keep it simple that works on all areas, than to have to remember each variation. It's bad enough the subtle differences between perl, php, javascript and java.
George Gallen Senior Programmer/Analyst Accounting/Data Division ggal...@wyanokegroup.com ph:856.848.9005 Ext 220 The Wyanoke Group http://www.wyanokegroup.com ________________________________________ From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org [u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Charlie Noah [cwn...@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 7:17 PM To: U2 Users List Subject: Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not? Hi George, Are there any implementations now that don't support X += 1? Not that I have a problem with X = X + 1 - works just fine and is very clear. I usually try to code to the common denominator, within reason, of course. Over my 34 years in the biz I've been through a lot of conversions of one MV to another. The most dreaded part was finding and fixing things that worked on the old system but not on the new. Universe is famous for being very forgiving and figuring out what you really meant. Jbase not so much. We spent a lot of time on issues like that. Regards, Charlie Noah On 01-16-2012 12:53 PM, George Gallen wrote: > This is one of the reasons why I continue to x=x+1 instead of x++ > > Not all languages support the ++, but they all support x=x+1 > > George > > -----Original Message----- > From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org > [mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Tony Gravagno > Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 1:50 PM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: Re: [U2] Brilliant? or not? > >> From: Charles_Shaffer >> Aside from it not being readable, compacting C code >> like that can reduce portability. Different compilers >> may evaluate complex, compacted code differently. > Same thing has actually happened with BASIC code that's ported > from one platform to another. > > Rule of thumb: Don't get cute. Spell out the code so that any > dumb compiler or programmer can read it. > > On-topic: that makes my response to this thread, "not". > > One of our colleagues from the mid 80's wrote code that was so > clean I liked to say we could eat off of it. I think he still > reads this forum: So to Mark Vander Veen, here we are over 20 > years later and I Still appreciate your code. Now THAT is > Brilliant. > > T > > _______________________________________________ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > _______________________________________________ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users > _______________________________________________ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users _______________________________________________ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
