×
The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.
Barbara wrote:
Even "I prefer <> to = because <> is like a little diamond" is higher on
the list.
... because <>'s are a girl's best friend ;-)
Norm Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Barbara Morris
Sent: Wednesday, 3 March 2010 11:36 PM
To: rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: More on RPG style
Peter Dow wrote:
... The compiler writer (hi Barbara!)
would probably implement "not =" and "<>" the same way.
...
The optimizer might boil it down to the same thing, but for "if not a =
b", the compiler doesn't know about the "not" when it's handling "a = b".
So for "if not a = b", the compiler would test for "a = b" and then
handle the NOT. For "if a <> b", the compiler would just test for "a <> b".
I hereby forbid anyone to use what I said above as a reason to prefer
"if a <> b"
over
"if not a = b"
There are many reasons to prefer one over the other, but performance
and/or program size are so far down the list, there isn't enough paper
in the world to get to that part of the list. Even "I prefer <> to =
because <> is like a little diamond" is higher on the list.
midrange.com
