Re: Who the bloody eff still codes CABEQ in this century?!?!?!? -- RPG400-L

Subject: Re: Who the bloody eff still codes CABEQ in this century?!?!?!?
From: John Yeung <gallium.arsenide@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2017 10:53:05 -0400
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l/>
List-help: <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: "RPG programming on the IBM i \(AS/400 and iSeries\)" <rpg400-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:rpg400-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l>, <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/options/rpg400-l>, <mailto:rpg400-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 7:35 AM, Henrik Rützou <hr@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I was thinking about code like this

C 80N42 43
COR 12N13N14
CAN 51N48 GOTO xxx

I think we can all agree that's a mess, but this is precisely the
thing that benefits most by converting to a proper `if` statement.
Even if you don't do any "refactoring" and just do a strict (mindless)
translation to `if`, at least the condition becomes easier to read.

John Y.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: Who the bloody eff still codes CABEQ in this century?!?!?!? , Henrik Rützou

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.