Re: Two reade loops: which one preferred ?

[G Armour <garmour400m@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thank goodness for the voice of reason!  <g>

Though I wonder, Henrik, why would this cost a few more cycles?  I can't
see logically how one could eat more cycles doing it this way.  But, of
course, this is not a paramount consideration.

GA

--- Henrik Krebs <hkrebs@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> A reason why style #1 might be preferred is that 'Do forever' is
> misinformational unless you have a veeery large file.
> 
> But I actually use style #3:
> ----- Style #3 -------------------------------------------
> 
> mykey setll record
> dou %eof
> mykey reade record
> if not %eof
> ... process ...
> endif
> enddo
> 
> because I think it's cleaner.
> Why?
> 1. First of all: Read can return either a) a record or b) an eof flag,
> and we (you) only want 'process' in case 'record'
>    You could also inside the loop have coded for both situations (select
> or if..else)
> 2. It's clean: only a single 'read' to control a 'read-loop'.  Both
> style #1 and #2 has two or three different routes through the code: zero
> records, a record read and no more records
> 3. No 'Do forever' that definately is not 'forever'
> 4. Same construction (the fewer the better) for 'read entire file'
> (except the missing setll of cause).
> 
> It might mean a few more cykles, but they are cheaper than programmer
> time
> 
> Henrik



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/