RE: Indicator Coding Technique

OK - you haven't stated an opinion but I will <grin>

I think it is horrible.

1) It gives give a new "look" to the old MOVE '0010010...' *IN01 nastiness.

2) It uses a somewhat meaningless name "FunctionKey" - all I know from this
is that it is function key related.  My initial thought was that it was for
testing if an F key was pressed.  From subsequent code I guess it is to do
with enabling the key.

3) Using a string like this to set the variable just causes the programmer
reading it to have to count to determine which F keys are enabled.  And he
_still_ doesn't know a thing about what the keys mean.  If the individual
indicators were named e.g. "enablePrompt" "enableExit" etc. and the code
then said enablePrompt =*On (or even better enablePrompt = true) I would
know what was going on.  A full block of 24 can still be used to clear all
of them at once.  If an F key has two functions, give it two names.

4) If I want to test/set multiples then I would still want to see at least a
named constant used which contained the correct sequence.  But I'd rather
see names used and individual tests.  The only time I'd group them like this
is to do perform an "Are they all on/off" type test and to enable a group
clear (e.g. when starting building a new subfile and all control indicators
need to be set).

I won't even get into names that begin with special symbols - that flame war
would last for weeks <grin>



Jon Paris
Partner400

www.Partner400.com
www.RPGWorld.com