Re: How do you read this code ?

["Charles Wilt" <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>]

I agree on the need to consider rather or not this was a previous undetected
bug.

However, if it turns out that it is, I don't think simply correcting the if
via a free-format statement with parentheses is the best way to fix it.

Instead, consider moving the if statement to it's own appropriately named
procedure.  It may seem silly at first glance to have what amounts to a
single line procedure:
d DescriptionOfBusinessCondition...
d                            pi          n
d   inTTBAST                          const like(TTBAST)
d   inTTA9CD                          const like(TTA9CD)
 /free
    return ( (inTTBAST = 'D' and ( inTTA9CD = '001'
                                       or inTTA9CD = '002'
                                       or inTTA9CD = '003'
                                       or inTTA9CD = '012'
                                       or inTTA9CD = '013'
                                        )

             or ( inTTBAST = 'H' and  inTTA9CD = ' ')
           );
/end-free

But from a maintenance standpoint, it makes life much easier.

You might even consider putting the test of TTA9CD in
('001','002','003','012','013') in it's own appropriately named procedure.

Then you'd be starting on the path to have modularized and reusable business
logic.

Charles


On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 3:41 PM, Douglas Handy <dhandy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > the free form converter does not change things much - does not add
> > parentheses - and/or precedence still controls it - and we are still
> > left with Joe's observation - this is a do-nothing condition, it seems.
>
> While I agree Joe's observation means his simple one-liner performs the
> equivalent function of the existing code, the fact they tried to setup the
> IF construct makes me suspect the code isn't working as originally
> intended.  So Joe's simplified version may just be maintaining a previously
> undetected bug.
>
> If I saw something like that in code, before simplifying to Joe's method I
> think it would be prudent to try to find out what the various fields and
> codes mean and whether a (different and corrected) form of the IF statment
> should be implemented.  Using free form and parentheses around each AND set
> and new lines for each OR condition can make the corrected code much easier
> to follow.
>
> Long live free format.  :)
>
> Doug
> --
> 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.