Re: Standards question: What is your feeling about %found & %eof vs. %found(file) & %eof(file) ? -- RPG400-L

Good News Everybody!

The new search engine is LIVE!

Please report any problems to david (at) midrange.com.

Subject: Re: Standards question: What is your feeling about %found & %eof vs. %found(file) & %eof(file) ?
From: Joe Pluta <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 08:50:26 -0500
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l>
List-help: <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries <rpg400-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:rpg400-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l>, <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l>, <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

john e wrote:

I always try to create readable (or "self documenting") code and always use %eof instead of %eof(name), because IMO this is much more readable. It is applying the priniciple of DRY (dont repeat yourself).

Then you're contradiciting yourself.

DRY is a programmer convenience issue, not a readability issue. In fact, all convenience coding is inherently less clear to the following programmer. You can't have both.

Joe

Follow-Ups:

RE: Standards question: What is your feeling about %found & %eofvs. %found(file) & %eof(file) ? , Hillier, Martin
RE: Standards question: What is your feeling about %found & %eofvs. %found(file) & %eof(file) ? , Lim Hock-Chai

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2026 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.