Re: debugging

The 88 name-condition works after the 77. The mistake was at COMP-3 that
must receive a - in fact...

"Oliver Wong" <owong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit dans le message de news:
XEHMf.7097$M52.4776@xxxxxxxxxxx

"Howard Brazee" <howard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:pte602lrhm5t0mn0uil4kkj1pmfoncfo3b@xxxxxxxxxx


Some compilers require all 77 levels be after all 01 levels. I don't
ever bother with 77 levels anymore, just use 01 levels. I don't
believe I've ever tried an 88 after a 77 level. See what happens
when you switch from 77 to 01. Usually I do:

01 Work-fields.
05 NW-FACT
88 FOK values "O", "o".

Fujitsu PowerCOBOL seems to allow 88s after 77s. They behave as you'd
expect (the 88 evaluating to true or false depending on the value of the
77).


It's not obvious to me what your compiler wants with:
0027:Name omitted; entry bypassed. PROCEDURE
27 PROCEDURE DIVISION.

But until that is solved, the subsequent error messages have no hope.

Could it have something to do with the semicolons showing up in the
DATA DIVISION? I've never seen semicolons there before.

[snip]
DATA DIVISION.
WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
[snip]
77 TOT PIC 9(6)V9(3); COMP 3.
77 TOT-ED PIC E(5)9.9(3).
77 TVA PIC 9(5)V9(3); COMP 3.
77 CONS-ED PIC *(5)9.99.
77 CPT PIC 99; COMP 0; VALUE 30.

PROCEDURE DIVISION.
[snip]

- Oliver


.