Re: Help with Compiler Errors

I'm not sure I agree.  The word that scares me most is "always", as in
"always bad programming.".  We have a lot of files that include *ISO date,
time, and timestamp items.  I don't know what I'd do without the PROCESS
option DATETIME.  Also, for some reason, single quotes are popular in COBOL
source originating on other platforms.  If this code is being implemented on
the 400,
somebody has to make a decision - accept compiler warnings, change all
single quotes to double quotes, or use PROCESS option APOST.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Leif Svalgaard" <leif@leif.org>
To: <cobol400-l@midrange.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 11:03 AM
Subject: Re: Help with Compiler Errors


> From: Eric Tubbs <eatubbs@email.com>
> I do have one question regarding the PROCESS APOST. though. Would it be
> "good" programming practice to always put this PROCESS starement in your
> code? if not, why?
>
> ===> it would be better to simply follow the COBOL standard and use
> double quotes in your text rather than apost. It is always bad programming
> to let compiler options determine the effect of your program. It is always
> best to say directly what you mean in the text itself. Doing so relieves
> the reader from paying attention to (at times obscure) options and also
> tends to make your program more portable.
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the COBOL Programming on the iSeries/AS400 (COBOL400-L) mailing
list
> To post a message email: COBOL400-L@midrange.com
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/cobol400-l
> or email: COBOL400-L-request@midrange.com
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/cobol400-l.
>
>