On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 16:51:27 +0200, Thomas Berg wrote: >> >> DO I =1 >> DO J = 1 >> DO K= 1 >> CALL P1 >> ... >> END K >> END J >> END I> >> P1: >> CALL P2 >> >> P2: PROCEDURE EXPOSE J >> LEAVE J >> > >Ok, I can see logic in this. Although it makes the code somewhat harder to >understand as You have to check the called procedures for those leave's if You >want to understand the loops. >An existing alternative would perhaps be RETURNing "LEAVE J" and: > > DO I =1 > DO J = 1 > DO K= 1 > CALL P1 > IF RESULT = 'LEAVE J' THEN LEAVE J > ... > END K > END J > END I > Again, if P1 were to do any processing after the call to P2 P1 would need to make the same test. This is just a form or set-a-flag-and-test-after-each-call.
It's a trivial exercise to convert any tangle of GOTOs to a DO containing a SELECT with no gain in legibility or in reliability. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
