Re: Declaration of INDEXED file
- From: Scott Peterson <scottp4.removethistoreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 13:09:14 -0700
"Richard" <riplin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Technically that is incorrect. 'next sentence' has a specific meaning
>being the point following the next full stop. You meant 'next
>statement'.
>
....or if you want to be really technical, next imperative statement,
although I think my meaning was clear.
>
>For example with no INVALID KEY and no USE a failing READ may just set
>an appropriate file status. If there is also no file status then it is
>likely that the program will stop with an error message.
At least in the IBM COBOL's I've worked on, it's not likely at all.
The IBM language reference for enterprise COBOL says it's permissible
to omit both the INVALID KEY and ERROR/EXCEPTION procedure. As you
say, this is probably an extension to the standard to remain
consistent with older IBM compilers.
In any case, it's the programmers responsibility to determine that the
file operation was successful and take appropriate action. If they
don't, it's the old "results are unpredictable". I would assume that
the program would simply continue.
Scott Peterson
--
It may be that your sole purpose in
this life is simply to serve as a
warning to others.
194/619
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Declaration of INDEXED file
- From: Richard
- Re: Declaration of INDEXED file
- From: Chuck Stevens
- Re: Declaration of INDEXED file
- References:
- Declaration of INDEXED file
- From: Volker
- Re: Declaration of INDEXED file
- From: Richard Maher
- Re: Declaration of INDEXED file
- From: Scott Peterson
- Re: Declaration of INDEXED file
- From: Richard
- Declaration of INDEXED file
- Prev by Date: Re: free reports tool
- Next by Date: Re: free reports tool
- Previous by thread: Re: Declaration of INDEXED file
- Next by thread: Re: Declaration of INDEXED file
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|