RE: Cycle Processing vs. Doing it my way

["Andrew Borts" <Andrewb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Okay - but what about those of us who are NOT windows programmers, but
old (careful here) COBOL mainframe programmers, >who do not use
pointers, the cycle was something with 1, 2 or more wheels.

That would make Jon Paris and Bob Cozzi, and Susan Ganter (and the like)
are Unicyclers that juggle while balancing people on their nose, while
I'm a 2 wheeled Cycler that rides w/out hands, that can do tricks like
wheelies but I get hurt once in a while and I can juggle but only while
standing still.  Tricks in the bag is all.

The Cycle is a personal thing.  6 line production code scares me as much
as it scares the rest of us.  It's a tool in the toolbox, kinda like
those old craftsman pliers that sit for years - can't throw them away
because they still come in handy once in a while.  There's a place for
everything.  When production is down though - and you have 3000 records
to correct with a P in the 4th field, and my client doesn't have SQL
loaded - that Cycle program is being whipped out in a shorter time then
it takes to say Rumplestilskin.  Berating them for not having tools
doesn't make friends and influence people.

>>> "Njal Fisketjon" <n.f@figu.no> 12/07/01 01:43PM >>>
Douglas Handy wrote:

> Just to play Devil's Advocate here, the same argument can be
> alledged against
> using pointers, or most APIs, or service programs with binding
> directories, or
> ...  (name your favorite new RPG IV feature here).

Andrew Borts / Webmaster
Seta Corporation
6400 East Rogers Circle
Boca Raton, FL 33499

E-mail: Andrewb@setacorporation.com
Corporate web site http://www.setacorporation.com
E-Commerce web site http://www.palmbeachjewelry.com
                              http://www.myfreeitems.com
Voice: 561-994-2660 Ext. 2211 / Fax: 561-997-0774