Re: Cycle Processing vs. Doing it my way

[Douglas Handy <dhandy1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Tyra,

>However the APIs, service programs, pointers, etc
>are new techniques that are available to all of us to learn.

As opposed to the cycle which is not available to all of us to learn?  Last I
checked, it was still supported in every version of the RPG compiler I had.  Did
I miss an announcement? <g>

>If I already
>know how to code WITHOUT the cycle, why should I go back and learn
>something

For the same reasons you learn any other technique.  It might prove useful, or
gasp, you may even see it in a program someday.

Heck, I could make RPG II do all kinds of stuff even before it had an IF
statement.  The fact you know how to code something WITHOUT using <insert
feature here> does not negate the potential usefulness of that feature.

Take a look at the sample "cycle" program I posted.  Is it *that* hard to
comprehend?

>I want to go FORWARD in my programming knowledge....

I don't think I can be accused of not wanting to learn new techniques, or not
have the language advance.  I wanted complete free-format with the first advent
of RPG IV.  I *love* subprocedures.  I have service programs for various API
collections.  Yada, yada.

But I don't throw the baby out with the bath water either.  I don't think of the
cycle as "backwards".  I think of it as "time tested". <g>

Doug