Re: DOW vs DOU

You just hit a sore spot with me   -  I agree completely with you,
actually.  The sore spot has to do with indicators in general.  01 through
99 is limiting.  Yet IBM has never really provided a standard programmer's
alternative.  I've thought there could have been a logical data type that
could be declared, or something like that.  (I am a bit hazy about it  - 
that's why I wish they'd have dealt with it.)   But if we could declare
our indicators in the new D specs, and their purpose, then we could use
them in the same exact fashion as 01 through 99 in place of *INxx.  

Something like:

D  CRok           I           IND           (IND is for "logical
INDicator") D* CRok = *ON = the indicator for "customer's CRedit is ok"

See what I mean?  Of course that's easy to duplicate but 50 programmers
will each have their own version.


In <970525180650_74711.77_BHW34-1@CompuServe.COM>, on 05/25/97 
   at 02:06 PM, John Carr <74711.77@CompuServe.COM> said:

#I'd cut off the hands of programmers (just kidding,... kinda) who use the
#SETON or SETOFF instead of MOVE *ON, *OFF for that reason.  Left hand
#indicators. are the same problem

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------
boothm@earth.goddard.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* This is the Midrange System Mailing List!  To submit a new message,   *
* send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".  To unsubscribe from     *
* this list send email to MAJORDOMO@midrange.com and specify            *
* 'unsubscribe MIDRANGE-L' in the body of your message.  Questions      *
* should be directed to the list owner / operator: david@midrange.com   *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *