Re: COBOL ain't quite dead - yet !



"Howard Brazee" <howard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ikbhg45qcfv8uut04l9o3gkfk9pulebu88@xxxxxxxxxx
On 29 Oct 2008 18:08:13 GMT, billg999@xxxxxxxxxxx (Bill Gunshannon)
wrote:

In article <747hg4965hgegcuojhe10um7ic1f5lnccg@xxxxxxx>,
Howard Brazee <howard@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
I have seen

PERFORM AAA THRU AAA-EXIT.

AAA SECTION.
AAA-PARAGRAPH.
...
AAA-EXIT.
EXIT.


This was the norm for "Structured COBOL" ala Shelley & Cashman back when
I was taking classes in the late 70's. Most of the programming standards
I ran into required it (back when programming shops actually had
standards!)

What advantage is this in either performing AAA or PERFORM
AAA-PARAGRAPH THRU AAA-EXIT?

There is none.

That's why you don't mix SECTIONs and Paragraph PERFORMS.

PERFORM AAA

....is less verbose than PERFORM AAA-PARAGRAPH THRU AAA-EXIT.

The less cluttered program code, is the easier it is to maintain. (In the
old days, the fact that it compiled quicker was a consideration too, but
that hardly applies any more...)


I can't see what might be considered detrimental to it. I think it makes
the code easier for humans to read as blocks are more plainly delineated.
And the compiler probably doesn't care one way or the other. :-)

bill


The logic doesn't make sense to me. Compilers do understand it, but
it's very much like dangerous loops where performed THRU code performs
itself.

No, it isn't, Howard. The "logic" says: PERFORM AAA

It is simple and clear. You could "translate" it mentally as "Do this
function...".

As long as GO TOs are avoided, and, if this rule MUST be broken, they are
limited to being within the same SECTION, and only as an EXIT mechanism,
there is no danger of looping whatsoever. I would agree that EXIT SECTION
can serve this function, but that is a relatively recent construct in the
history of COBOL, not everybody has it, and it doesn't have the same
aesthetic appeal for some people that a GO TO exit does.



In the same way, I like XML nested syntax requirements better than
HTML nested syntax requirements. Keep the logic clean.


Agreed :-)

Pete.
--
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: COBOL aint quite dead - yet !
    ... Howard Brazee writes: ... I ran into required it (back when programming shops actually had standards!) ... AAA-PARAGRAPH THRU AAA-EXIT? ... following the other rules of "Structured COBOL" the functions of your ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: COBOL aint quite dead - yet !
    ... PERFORM AAA THRU AAA-EXIT. ... I hate that, but apparently it works. ... sometimes I will replace the EXIT. ... James Madison ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)