Re: IF statement, I don't understand this

When I use 88 levels, I like their names to have the same root as the
data-name to which they apply, .e.g.

One of the reasons that I dislike 88 levels is that sometimes I need to
search for all uses of a variable using, say, grep, and the 88 levels
hide this usage. Certainly if the condition names were qualifed this
would avoid the problem entirely, but how would one guarantee that it
had been done in every case. Using the root name on the condition does
allow searching as long as the root is sufficiely unique.

But I tend to not use 88 levels at all because the various values are
still in the program even if they are localised and not in PD. I
prefer to have such data values in a 'decode file' which can be
modified by the user as required to suit changing needs.

For example the 'interest-bearing' example should (IMHO) be done by
having the interest rate in a file where authorized people can change
it and you find out if this is interest bearing or not by testing the
rate for zero. If the attribute of 'not interest bearing' is actually
not related to a zero rate then some other flag in the record should
say 'Y' or 'N' (or equivalent). Building codes such as 11, 21, 31, 41
into the program in PD or in 88s is just not good practice, except for
generating programmer job security.

.