Re: FOR loop limit

[Rory Hewitt <roryhewitt@xxxxxxxxx>]

Alan,

Certainly it's a better idea to use an integer in terms of performance and
the the OP wouldn't have hit *this* problem (overflowing at 1000), but if
he'd specified, for instance, a 3I field, he'd have hit a problem at 128,
since a 3I field can only store up to 127. Or at 32768 for a 5I field.

The underlying problem is that the FOR loop checks for 'greater-than-limit'
rather than 'equal-to-limit' - in other words, your index has to be able to
take a value 1 greater than the limit.

Rory
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Alan Campin <alan0307d@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> The solution is simple. Don't use packed decimal for loop index. Many,
> many times slower. Always, always use integers. The compiler is
> working correctly.