× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.


  • Subject: RE: SV: C style assignment of variable values
  • From: Chris Bipes <ChrisB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 7 Oct 1999 08:56:00 -0700

I also agree with KISS.  Yes too many choices and one can get lost.  I have
been learning C lately and had a hard time with the A+=1.  Why not code
A=A+1?  Does the compiler use a faster CPU instruction with the C syntax?
Is it more efficient processing?  I like the pointers, procedures and other
C type functions that have been added to RPG, but let not make RPG into C.
Both languages have their place.  I agree that if you need the functions of
C then buy a C compiler and program in C.  Or have someone write the C
routines for you and give you a service program that you can bind to your
RPG.

Christopher K. Bipes    mailto:ChrisB@Cross-Check.com
Sr. Programmer/Analyst  mailto:Chris_Bipes@Yahoo.com
CrossCheck, Inc.                http://www.cross-check.com
6119 State Farm Drive   Phone: 707 586-0551 x 1102
Rohnert Park CA  94928  Fax: 707 586-1884

*Note to Recruiters
I nor anyone that I know of is interested in any new and/or exciting
positions. Please do not contact me.


-----Original Message-----
From: Denis Robitaille [mailto:DRobitaille@cascades.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 1999 7:11 AM
To: RPG400-L@midrange.com
Subject: Re: SV: C style assignment of variable values


Here is my 2 cents on this:

I think that those who want the C syntax could achive it by purchasing the C
compiler. (Sorry if this sound rude, I do not mean to)

For me (with no C background) A+=1 is not more meaningfull than A = A + 1

I can easyly code a procedure like: CALLP inc(A:1) to achive the same thing
right now.

When  the CF spec becomes available, I will code:

Inc(A:1) or Increment(A:1)

I also do not like the idea of providing too many ways of doing the same
thing. When you do that, you end up with PL1 and this can also make programs
harder to maintain.

Example: shop A as a standard for incrementing of :   A = A + 1
                shop B as a standard for incrementing of :   A +=
                shop C as a standard for incrementing of :   A = *same + 1

If someone from shop A has to maintain code from shop B or C, He must first
get acustom with this coding style.

At the present, shop A,B and C have the same standard: A = A + 1 because it
is the onlyt way to go.


Denis Robitaille
Directeur service technique
Cascades Inc
819 363 5187
fax 819 363 5177
+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

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.