Re: FOR loop limit

[Rory Hewitt <roryhewitt@xxxxxxxxx>]

Jeff,

It's always been a pain like this. I assume there's some
backwards-compatibility issue that made it work like this:

for x = 1 to 3;
  ...do something
endfor;

After the loop, x is 4, *not* 3.

If you step through in debug, you can see how it stops on the endfor after
the 3rd time and then stops again on the endfor before moving on. It's
documented in the RPG manual, but still it seems screwy to me. Couldn't they
have added processing to not increment the counter after the last one (or to
decrement it back again)?

Rory

On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Jeff Crosby <jlcrosby@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> I learned something new today.
>
> Take the following program:
>
>     D x               S              3P 0
>     D y               S              3P 0
>
>      /free
>
>       *INLR = *On;
>       Y = 999;
>
>       For X = 1 To Y By 1;
>       EndFor;
>
>       Return;
>
>      /end-free
>
>
> The program bombs with the dreaded "Message . . . . :   The target for a
> numeric operation is too small to hold the result (C G D F)."
>
> I guess when the endfor is reached the last time through, it attempts to
> set
> the value of x to 1,000.
>
> Live and learn.