|
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 3:20 PM, John Yeung <gallium.arsenide@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
John,
Ah, but it could be!
I can't say what Kevin's tooling does, but if you can wrap a chunk of
code in an artificial DO loop (so that you can use LEAVE), then you
could also (in principle) wrap that same chunk of code in a
subroutine, so that you can use LEAVESR.
Then leave setting the indicator and RETURN in the (syntactic) mainline.
So, something along the lines of
//syntactic mainline
exsr @MAIN;
parm12 = *in12;
return;
...
begsr @MAIN;
//semantic mainline part1
if something LEAVESR
//semantic mainline part2
if somethingelse LEAVESR
//semantic mainline part 3
endsr;
I realize it feels kind of radical to "move" so much code to "the
bottom". But it would be one way to get rid of the GOTOs without
introducing a loop.
Ordinarily, I hate the idea of a mainline that's just an EXSR / CALLP.
But as they say, there's no problem in CS that can't be solved by adding
another layer of abstraction.
So this idea has merit.
My only concern from a general standpoint, is if there was a GOTO @END in
a secondary subroutine, LEAVESR won't work, but the EXSR @END_PROGRAM;
would....
Will have to ponder this...
Thanks!
Charles
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.