RE: Classic Traps -- I need your input!

Good luck with your article Scott, but when this thread is finished everyone will know all the traps!


Rory Hewitt wrote :
<for x = 1 to 4;
< do stuff
<endfor;
<
<X is now 5, *not* 4.
<
<Maybe not a 'classic' trap, though...

If we've all fallen into it, so it must be a classic.


Simon Coulter wrote:
<True, you have the cost of a procedure call but you get self- documenting code as a result.

So true. I'd say not bothering to write subprocedures is a classic trap. Some people don't write any at all. When you see their screens with SEU, as opposed to LPEX editor, your lucky to see more than 2 lines of code in between the comments.

Bob Cagle wrote:
<Classic Trap #1 for me: Getting caught up reading all the great info on the Midrange.com lists, when I should actually be <getting some real work done!

I agree the list has become addictive. Trouble with living in Europe is, you arrive in the morning, the yanks are now all asleep. Now you see what they've been doing the whole night long. Filling up your mailbox! Takes a good hour to get started sometimes!

Birgitta Hauser wrote :
<Here an other trap with embedded SQL:

Classic trap: discovering embedded SQL and then using it all the time instead of the usual RPG commands.