Joe,
It is really not a matter of convenience for me. My kool-aid fill brain
truly think that without qualify name is more readable.
Like you said before, it might be just a style preferences.
Just like some programmers like to test indicator this way:
If isMoreData;
... Do something
if not *in99;
... So something
endif;
Endif;
And other like to test indicator this way:
If isMoreData = *on;
... Do something
if *in99 = *off;
... So something
endif;
Endif;
-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Joe Pluta
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 8:50 AM
To: RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries
Subject: Re: Standards question: What is your feeling about %found &
%eofvs. %found(file) & %eof(file) ?
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
--
This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L) mailing
list To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe,
unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit:
http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at
http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.
midrange.com
