RE: Divide by zero monitoring

["Reeve Fritchman" <reeve@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Bob has a point.  Mike, if you can put everything into a couple of arrays,
you can eliminate the redundant coding of checking for a zero divisor.  Loop
through all the elements and check element by element...

-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-admin@midrange.com [mailto:rpg400-l-admin@midrange.com]On
Behalf Of Bob Cozzi (RPGIV)
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 4:26 PM
To: rpg400-l@midrange.com
Subject: RE: Divide by zero monitoring

Let's not forget, that there is overhead involved in calling a
procedure!
I ran a test using the XLATE operation in my TOUPPER()
procedure/function. It took 26 times longer to run the code in a
procedure than it did as in-line code. Now, that's a couple lines of
code vs a procedure wrapper for that same few lines of code.  Of course
if you put 100 lines of code into a procedure, the overhead isn't going
to increase, it'll stay the same.

Until IBM adds a "Inline" keyword to procedures, use of procedures for
certain time-critical things (like math) might be better left on the
wish list.


Specs:

Called the procedure 30000 times
vs.
Inline XLATE and SUBST opcodes.

Procedure was approximately 14.17 units of measure.
Inline code was 0.02 units of measure.

So the overhead for a procedure call is X where X = approx. 13.8 units
of measure regardless of the size of the procedure.

Bob Cozzi
cozzi@rpgiv.com
Visit the on-line  Midrange  Developer  forum at: http://www.rpgiv.com


> -----Original Message-----
> From: rpg400-l-admin@midrange.com [mailto:rpg400-l-admin@midrange.com]
On
> Behalf Of Reeve Fritchman
> Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 2:58 PM
> To: rpg400-l@midrange.com
> Subject: RE: Divide by zero monitoring
>
> This is a great application for a subprocedure:    EVAL RESULT  =
> DIVIDE(FACTOR1:FACTOR2)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rpg400-l-admin@midrange.com
[mailto:rpg400-l-admin@midrange.com]On
> Behalf Of jpcarr@tredegar.com
> Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 3:44 PM
> To: rpg400-l@midrange.com
> Subject: Re: Divide by zero monitoring
>
>
> Ya,  you have to test for it
>
>
>  C                   IF                      (TOT <> 0)
> C                   EVAL(H)   PARR(OC)   =  ((PTRUNHR/TOT) * 100)
> C                   ELSE
> C                   EVAL      PARR(OC)  =   0
>
> John Carr
>
> ---------------
> For the EVAL statement, is there a way to monitor for divide by zero
> errors?
> We just want to ignore the statement then continue on. Or will I have
to do
> an ol' fashioned IF statement?
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L) mailing
list
> To post a message email: RPG400-L@midrange.com
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/rpg400-l
> or email: RPG400-L-request@midrange.com
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L) mailing
list
> To post a message email: RPG400-L@midrange.com
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/rpg400-l
> or email: RPG400-L-request@midrange.com
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.


_______________________________________________
This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L) mailing list
To post a message email: RPG400-L@midrange.com
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@midrange.com
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.