|
Rob, I guess I don't see the infinite loop as a major problem, since it would be picked up in testing surely :-) The only reason I mentioned the subroutine was to balance your comment about convoluted mainlines (if you use full error handling) or missing error handlign (if you don't). Until we have Bob's read-expression (which I don't actually like, but that's just me), I'm going to continue to use subroutines - they allow me to have full error-handling with easy-to-understand code and minimal structural runtime overhead. Rory (aka "he who *rarely* codes an infinite loop and *almost* always picks it up in testing") On 3/19/07, rob@xxxxxxxxx <rob@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Rory, With the subroutine, vs subprocedure you still have the potential for an infinite loop if you use one of the GOTO's in disguise (like IF, isn't IF just another GOTO?). If your IF, or ITER, bypasses the EXSR. Rob Berendt
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
