In situations where there are multiple reads I usually just pass the whole @RECORD.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mark Johnson Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 21:52 To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: Re: [U2] OPEN vs TRANS I've actually run into a program with 10 READV's, some processing then 10 WRITEV's for the obvious same record in the same file. Is the OCONV(translate) function any more or less effecient in BASIC than in English (sic). I use them for simple validation or to retrieve one field with no side effects. If I need another field, I use OPEN and READ. Thanks Mark Johnson ----- Original Message ----- From: "Timothy Snyder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org> Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 5:21 PM Subject: RE: [U2] OPEN vs TRANS > "Allen E. Elwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 10/07/2005 12:53:47 PM: > > > The way I look at it, when I started programming 30 years ago systems > were > > millions of times slower, and in another 30 years they'll be so stinking > > fast that coding for speed will go the way of the Suchomimus and the > > Iguanodon! > > As long as programmers think that way, their employers will continue to > pay people like me big bucks to come in and make the code more efficient. > ;-) Sometimes more powerful systems can make bottlenecks more prominent. > Today's systems are expected to process more data in a shorter time, and > to provide more functionality than in days of yore, so even minor > inefficiencies are encountered over and over again. IMHO, there will > always be room for efficient coding techniques. Some folks claim you have > to sacrifice maintainability and readability for the sake of efficiency - > I've rarely found that to be true. As long as you care about and consider > both performance and maintainability as you develop code, it all just > falls together. > > Now, as to people who want to code one line instead of two (e.g.: the > topic of this thread), I say take a touch typing course so you don't mind > a few extra keystrokes. (I've always been amazed watching seasoned > professionals using only one finger on each hand to write programs.) I > would much rather inherit a program that does its own opens and reads > instead of doing translates. Sooner or later somebody will want to get a > second field from the record and you'll be faced with doing two translates > or changing it to the way it should have been done in the first place. > Plus, the OCONV with a translate isn't nearly as obvious to the casual > observer of the code. Of course, you could put in some comments to make > it clear, but those keystrokes could have been spent opening the file at > the top of the program. > > > Tim Snyder > Consulting I/T Specialist , U2 Professional Services > North American Lab Services > DB2 Information Management, IBM Software Group > 717-545-6403 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ------- > u2-users mailing list > u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
