RE: More on RPG style

What is the system but a bunch of logic circuits? You can't tell me it
doesn't all get down to ones and zeros eventually.

Bless you, Sharon; my day was far too easy until you appeared. :)

I don't recall saying otherwise. In fact, I agreed with you. I changed the
focus; reworded the statement so that it cannot even appear to be about such
complexities. What more do you want?

Since you've dragged me out again though (and I hope Barb Morris will chime
in here) I wouldn't be a bit surprised if the compiler doesn't take the '<>'
and turn it into a "not equal." And since we're not writing the compiler
(or at least I'm not) I'll assume that to be the case until proven
otherwise.

I'll also add is my final effort on this:

From a readability/maintainability perspective, it is better to have a

construct that takes advantage of positive statements than one that
leverages negatives. For example:

IF NOT CONDITION1
...
ELSE
...
ENDIF


Can be cumbersome to read, and may (repeat, MAY) be more legible in the
positive, as in:
IF CONDITION1
...
ELSE
...
ENDIF

By that same token, it is better (for readability and perhaps for
performance to a very slight degree) to use an equal condition test, such as
IF A = B ;
...
ELSE
...
ENDIF

Rather than the obvious converse.

Dennis Lovelady
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dennislovelady
--
"Those who make the worst use of their time are the first to complain of its
shortness."
-- Jean de La Bruyre