Re: COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !
- From: billg999@xxxxxxxxxxx (Bill Gunshannon)
- Date: 29 Oct 2008 15:55:50 GMT
In article <aq%Nk.15914$o57.14136@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"tlmfru" <lacey@xxxxxxx> writes:
Howard Brazee <howard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:7isgg4lh42b61712dijr6otf1otsscuj92@xxxxxxxxxx
When I worked for EDS a decade or more ago, our published standard was
for each perform to be of a section that consisted of a paragraph and
an exit which wasn't used. I disliked it back then, and hope it has
been changed since.
--
Lots of people these days insist that a PERFORM must address only a
paragraph name (i.e., don't use THRU). This ancient EDS standard at least
conforms in appearance!
I can think of valid reasons for insisting on either method as a
corporate standard. One needs to know why one was choosen over the
other rather than just arguing that one way is somehow better than
the other. To be honest, the biggest surprise is that there is a
standard at all. Too many places I know ofatoday have no defined
standard at all and just the programmer write code in whatever style
the programmer feels most comfortable with. not the way it used to
be when I was doing applications programming for a living.
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. Three wolves
billg999@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !
- From: Howard Brazee
- Re: COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !
- References:
- COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !
- From: James J. Gavan
- Re: COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !
- From:
- Re: COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !
- From: Silfax
- Re: COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !
- From: tlmfru
- Re: COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !
- From: Howard Brazee
- Re: COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !
- From: tlmfru
- COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !
- Prev by Date: Re: COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !
- Next by Date: Re: COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !
- Previous by thread: Re: COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !
- Next by thread: Re: COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|