RE: what is unclear about 01 02 03 -Reply

[PaulMmn <PaulMmn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

York wrote:

>I'm glad you said we geezers are -usually- harmless. Don't get us
>started about MFCUs.
>
>By the way. you forgot to mention that the indicator could optionally
>have an 'N' in front of it (ie N01 02N03) which means it must be OFF
>instead of ON. There also could be AN (for and) or OR in front of the
>indicators.
>
>This would lead to code like this:
>
>    01N02 03
>AN 07N08 05
>ORN15 23             GOTO TAG01

                      line-of-code
                      line-of-code
                      line-of-code
                      line-of-code

              TAG01   TAG



>What's not to like?


Actually, your code snippet is better than the 'original' way this would
have been coded (if you'll excuse me not inverting the boolean logic):



        01N02 03
     AN 07N08 05
     ORN15 23           line-of-code
        01N02 03
     AN 07N08 05
     ORN15 23           line-of-code
        01N02 03
     AN 07N08 05
     ORN15 23           line-of-code
        01N02 03
     AN 07N08 05
     ORN15 23           line-of-code


York's use of a 'GOTO' to branch around the code that doesn't meet the
proper conditions is a fine example of the -proper- way for an old geezer
to code!  (:


--Paul E Musselman
PaulMmn@ix.netcom.com


+---
| 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 MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---