Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
GOTO falls under the category of religion As The Grand PooBah of the
Church Of Where-Do-I-GOTO, I, The Reverend Rabbi Ayatollah Davey Ben Davey,
deeply resent the slur upon the fine religion of Where-Do-I-GOTO by knaves
and fools who know nothing of its
if you venture deep into some of the low level time functions in *nix (
aka C code) you'll find goto's...
This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or
proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity to
which it is addressed. If the reader of
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bruce Nichol
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 9:33 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Goo'day,
At 19:30 28/12/04 -0500, you wrote:
It is a silly argument...
I just think about utilizing a goto or its facsmile within
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 7:44 AM
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
if you venture deep into some of the low level time functions in *nix (
aka C code) you'll find goto's...
This e-mail, including attachments, may include
Debster [EMAIL PROTECTED]@[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 12/28/2004 07:30:37
PM:
It is a silly argument...
I agree
:)
---
u2-users mailing list
u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Bruce Nichol
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 9:33 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Goo'day,
At 19:30 28/12/04 -0500, you wrote:
It is a silly argument...
I just think about
IF i WHILE and LOOP and NOT GOTO the doctors I will WEND up in the hospital.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 5:27 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO
the use of goto's or lack of shouldn't be a judge of sloppy coding .
sloppy coding is just sloppy coding.
remember one persons slop is another persons pudding :)
example 1:
y=0
loop
readnext z else y = 1
if y = 1 then exit
do stuff
repeat
more stuff
vs
example 2:
10: readnext
]
www.valuepart.com
-Original Message-
From: Peter D Olson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 9:12 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject:RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
the use of goto's or lack of shouldn't be a judge of sloppy coding .
sloppy coding
Of Peter D Olson
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 10:12 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
the use of goto's or lack of shouldn't be a judge of sloppy coding .
sloppy coding is just sloppy coding.
remember one persons slop is another persons pudding
Please move this to U2-Community.
- Charles Barouch, Moderator
-- Original Message -
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 10:00:09 -0600
From: Marilyn Hilb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
I love it when folks use
: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 9:12 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
the use of goto's or lack of shouldn't be a judge of sloppy coding .
sloppy coding is just sloppy coding.
remember one persons slop is another persons pudding :)
example
ONCE AGAIN: MOVE THIS TO U2-COMMUNITY!
This belongs on U2-Community, not on U2-Users. GOTO falls under the
category of religion and this is a technology mailing list. Off-topic
matters belong on U2-Community.
- Charles Barouch, Moderator
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - U2-Users Moderator
--
To
PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
ONCE AGAIN: MOVE THIS TO U2-COMMUNITY!
This belongs on U2-Community, not on U2-Users. GOTO falls under the
category of religion and this is a technology mailing list. Off-topic
matters belong on U2-Community
@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Allen E. Elwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 13 Dec 2004 09:36:42
-0800
I didn't include the delete statement because what you really wanted
to test was the LOOP/REPEAT vs. the GO construct. Guess what? After
doing four consecutive runs
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 5:27 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
While quibbling over nanoseconds, some of may have missed a little flaw
in your tests
Hi Dean,
While quibbling over nanoseconds, some of may have missed a little flaw
in your tests that would have nothing to do with caching or memory
allocation.
Didn't actually miss that one. It is the reason why I ran my tests 4 times,
figuring that the average of the four would be close enough
On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 19:30:37 -0500, you wrote:
It is a silly argument...
I just think about utilizing a goto or its facsmile within C++. C, C# (not
that I ever did) and it would quickly garner a big red F in school...
I don't know of any other language where it would even get beyond a snicker
@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
While quibbling over nanoseconds, some of may have missed a little flaw
in your tests that would have nothing to do with caching or memory
allocation. The elapsed time of each test could have been different
enough that the differences
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 10:33 AM
Subject: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
My intent is not to start a religious discussion about GO or GOTOs because
I see that method all over the place and regardless of why, who or
whatever, my question is,
In a message dated 13/12/2004 15:49:31 GMT Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've seen 2 ways to read a client key, change the length to 6 digits, then
write it back out, delete the old one and move on:
EXAMPLE 1 of 2:
!(FIXEMPNO) - Fix the employee number length
open '','CUSTEMP' to
example 2 does not test DONE - why not READNEXT K ELSE EXIT
cannot prove it, but I suspect both of these paragraphs would function
identically at the object-code level.
Rick
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday,
If You correct the second example so the loop stops when the list is
exhausted
it will be the same.
They are very likely to compile to exactly the same pseudo-code.
And even if they don't the body of the loop is so heavy, having a
write and a read
and a delete in it, so You've no
quote who=Rick Ramsey
example 2 does not test DONE - why not READNEXT K ELSE EXIT
You are quite right. I forgot putting that line in.
until DONE do . . .
cannot prove it, but I suspect both of these paragraphs would function
identically at the object-code level.
Rick
-Original
Hi Karl,
Thank you for asking that question, 'cause funny as it sounds I never
thought to do a speed test on this construct.
I didn't include the delete statement because what you really wanted to test
was the LOOP/REPEAT vs. the GO construct. Guess what? After doing four
consecutive runs and
I'm not sure of the BASIC SELECT. I've always used it and don't remember
ever seeing any adverse affects therefrom.
As for the safety option. It might apply somewhere else, but not in this
little example. The file contained only about 80 items and a list showed
no duplicates either before or
quote who=Allen Egerton
Loops are loops, they're executed internally with jumps and skips... The
LOOP WHILE construct is for the programmer, not for the runtime machine.
You really want faster? Create a new file sized appropriately, read the
rec
from original file, modify the key, write
Just checking that you understand the problem with either of these methods.
If the key length is already 6 digits then you will end up deleting the
record.
Richard
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 10:33 AM
Subject: [U2]
, use
the (O option in COPY for optimum performance.
My 1 cent.
- Original Message -
From: Allen Egerton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday
quote who=[EMAIL PROTECTED]
In a message dated 13/12/2004 15:49:31 GMT Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I've seen 2 ways to read a client key, change the length to 6 digits,
then
write it back out, delete the old one and move on:
EXAMPLE 1 of 2:
!(FIXEMPNO) - Fix the employee
Since you have the 2 pieces of code wouldn't the best approach be to benchmark
it on the system which is going to run it.
Or am I just getting old remembering when we needed to benchmark...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
[EMAIL
asking.
- Original Message -
From: Derek Falkner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 11:15 AM
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Karl,
I cannot speak to the issue of speed but I am concerned about the safety
of
either process; I believe you
Sort of like deleting MV's backwards in an attribute to not miss any. Been
there as well.
- Original Message -
From: Dean Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 2:04 PM
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Your understanding of the BASIC
: Monday, December 13, 2004 11:04
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Your understanding of the BASIC select is correct. It starts in group one
and works it's way down. In my early years of PICK programming I learned
this the hard way. As this user hasn't yet seen
-
From: Derek Falkner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 11:16 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Karl,
I cannot speak to the issue of speed but I am concerned about the safety
of
either process; I believe you may end up
PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Allen E. Elwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 13 Dec 2004 09:36:42 -0800
I didn't include the delete statement because what you
really wanted to test was the LOOP/REPEAT vs. the GO
construct. Guess what? After doing four consecutive runs
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:07:38 -0700 (MST), you wrote:
snip
Why does creating a new file make it faster?
Couple reasons. Mostly because you're not deleting the original,
which means fewer disk accesses. Remember that until the file's
reclaimed, a delete is actually a mark as deleted, not a
]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 11:52 AM
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Karl,
You probably already know this, but the second example will never
terminate.
I believe you intended to include a
LOOP WHILE DONE = 0 DO
or
LOOP UNTIL DONE DO
but the code
Oh please God no
--
Debster
-- Original message --
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:07:38 -0700 (MST), you wrote:
Why does creating a new file make it faster?
Couple reasons. Mostly because you're not deleting the original,
which means fewer disk accesses. Remember
.
Richard
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 3:10 PM
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
quote who=Dean Fox
Your understanding of the BASIC select is correct. It starts in group
one
and works it's way down
.
They had it wrong too!
Derek Falkner
Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 3:11 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
quote
Karl,
I cannot speak to the issue of speed but I am concerned about the safety of
either process; I believe you may end up with missing employees!
I believe the BASIC SELECT sets a pointer at the start of group 1 and steps
it through each item in that group before moving on to group 2. What
Karl,
You probably already know this, but the second example will never terminate.
I believe you intended to include a
LOOP WHILE DONE = 0 DO
or
LOOP UNTIL DONE DO
but the code does not include that necessary piece. As to actual code
produced, I do not know. However, I would recommend the
from the compiler
and that ain't gonna happen.
- Original Message -
From: Allen E. Elwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 12:36 PM
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Hi Karl,
Thank you for asking that question, 'cause funny as it sounds I
Message-
From: Derek Falkner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 11:16 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Karl,
I cannot speak to the issue of speed but I am concerned about the safety of
either process; I believe you may end up with missing
UPDATE filename SET @ID = EVAL FMT(@ID,'R%6');
Poetry, Poetry.
---
u2-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
who ordered a pizza and asked to have it cut in 6 slices cause he
didn't think he could eat 8?
Mark
- Original Message -
From: Allen E. Elwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 2:30 PM
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Hi Mark!
No, I don't
second decrease as I have a lot more windows open now.
Allen
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mark Johnson
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 10:35
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Be careful of consecutive speed
: Monday, December 13, 2004 14:28
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Karl,
I am on thin ice here but, so far, nobody has stepped in with a better
explanation, so I'll give it a try.
Your first SELECT creates a list of items called the active select list. It
takes a little
OPEN ,FILE . . .
That saved me at least one keypress per quote...
KLP
Just asking.
- Original Message -
From: Derek Falkner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 11:15 AM
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
Karl,
I cannot speak
quote who=Bob Witney
Since you have the 2 pieces of code wouldn't the best approach be to
benchmark it on the system which is going to run it.
Or am I just getting old remembering when we needed to
benchmark...
BenchmarK? We can do that? You must live in a dream world...
I guess I
]
Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT
quote who=Dean Fox
Your understanding of the BASIC select is correct. It starts in group
one and works it's way down. In my early years of PICK programming I
learned this the hard way. As this user hasn't yet seen adverse
effects is luck vs
52 matches
Mail list logo
