Re: trimming non-numerics

["mlazarus@xxxxxxxx" <mlazarus@xxxxxxxx>]

Hans,

 Upon rereading the code, I see that you're correct.  The reason being that
you've reversed which side of the compare the constant is.

 I think that:
         if %subst(source:i:1) >= '0' and %subst(source:i:1) <= '9';

 is a little easier to read quickly.  If you replace (paraphrase in
English) the code "%subst(source:i:1)" with the phrase "character to test"
and read it out loud, you'll see what I mean.

 -mark

Original Message:
-----------------
From: Hans Boldt boldt@xxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2004 11:35:31 -0400
To: rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: trimming non-numerics


mlazarus@xxxxxxxx wrote:

> Hans,
> 
>  Why do you say the using %Xlate / %Replace is overkill?  Is it
performance
> you're concerned with?  It would be fewer statements (either one or two)
> and doesn't reduce legibility, IMHO.
> 
>  Obviously, if there are other, unexpected, characters to strip out of the
> source string, then that's a different story.  But that did not seem to be
> the case here.
> 
> 
>  As an aside, the statement:
> 
>         if '0' <= %subst(source:i:1) and %subst(source:i:1) <= '9';
>  should read:
>         if '0' >= %subst(source:i:1) and %subst(source:i:1) <= '9';


No, this time I actually tested the code I posted. I first had it coded 
as per your recommendation, but that didn't work.

Cheers! Hans


--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .