even changes the way I do my daily work on the IBM mainframe. Example : In the old days I would think nothing of coding this (in PL/1) :
Now I coded it like this :
the != is not correct PL/1 but I cant find the correct char here x'5F' in EBCDIC
Joined: Feb 16, 2001
PL/1 -- holy cow, old languages do never die!! I'm still on the fence about not-logic. There are some instances where it is easier and makes sense, and others where it is just old habit. We have some horrendous code that uses not-named variables with not logic
The genius who coded that was also not consistent with how he loaded the variable. So notFinished=False could mean it was finished or not finished, depending on his whims. As per your code, I try to avoid null code blocks, and when I use them, I make sure to put a comment in saying that I know it is blank. Bruce.
Joined: Jan 05, 2001
I agree. It is sometimes clearer to use != than to always use ==. In natural language it would be possible to avoid using "not", but sometimes using it is the simplest way to say something.
Johannes de Jong
Joined: Jan 27, 2001
Yes I dont like null statements either but heck I was work on a thight schedule today, the code had to run before 17:00, else I had to wait another week to test it. Sort of snap shot moment of the PDS'd directories of our production libaries at 17:00. As for the negative "! finished" it makes a "moerse" lot of sense to me. I suppose one can, or rather should, do something like this :
Am I getting the point Marilyn ???
[This message has been edited by Johannes de Jong (edited March 17, 2001).]