Re: Eval Exception Error Trapping

[boldt@xxxxxxxxxx]

Dave wrote:
>You are right that the *PSSR sucks. (you said it bro).  But it is very useful
and
>can be enhanced.  What it badly needs is a *CONTINUE in the ENDSR besides the
>*GETIN *DETAIL etc.   This way I can deal with the error and continue with the
>next statement without missing a beat.

For a while, I had been pushing for a *CONTINUE option, but
there were some technical and performance issues involved.
Basically, for every operation that could fail with an
exception, we would have to know what the next logical
operation was.  It could have been handled for opcodes by
maintaining a pointer to the next statement, but that was
considered too much overhead and we would still have to
define what happened in other spec types.

Another problem I see with enhancing the *PSSR and INFSR is
that even if you have a *CONTINUE option, you still have to
decide where you came from in order to know how to properly
handle the error.  This is already almost as bad as figuring
out where to go once you handle the error!

>The CF solution is great but aren't we
>trying so much like basic and c that we are erasing our unique RPG ways? (let
the
>war of the languages begin ...  1 2 3  go 8-) )

Aaah!  Language wars are so much fun!

On the other hand, we can learn a lot from other programming
languages.  RPG has it's unique ways, but haven't you noticed
that there aren't a lot of other languages that borrow concepts
from RPG?

Cheers!  Hans

Hans Boldt, ILE RPG Development, IBM Toronto Lab, boldt@ca.ibm.com


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* This is the RPG/400 Discussion Mailing List!  To submit a new         *
* message, send your mail to "RPG400-L@midrange.com".  To unsubscribe   *
* from this list send email to MAJORDOMO@midrange.com and specify       *
* 'unsubscribe RPG400-L' in the body of your message.  Questions should *
* be directed to the list owner / operator: david@midrange.com          *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *