HP3000-L Archives

February 2001, Week 3

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Shawn Gordon <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Shawn Gordon <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 15 Feb 2001 21:08:22 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (30 lines)
At 03:14 PM 2/15/2001, Doug Becker wrote:
>One of the things we did in the early 1970s was to create copy code for
>COBOL for both the DATA DIVISION and the PROCEDURE DIVISION in the student
>records systems.
>
>It was very effective, and we could develop code very quickly and
>flawlessly because the procedures we needed were already debugged.
>
>This was handy too, because we didn't need to call a bunch of confusing
>subroutines or have hidden code.
>
>We have never seen the copy of PROCEDURE DIVISION code before or since and
>find this curious in spite of the fact that it can be very useful.
>
>Anyone else use copied paragraphs and sections in the PROCEDURE DIVISION?

Depending on the size and complexity of the code, I would do that
sometimes, but usually would either make it a macro in a copylib or make it
a callable routine.  Personally I always hated programs that had huge
amount of code in copylibs, but things like error routines or image call
routines were ok IMO.

Regards,

Shawn Gordon
President
theKompany.com
www.thekompany.com
949-713-3276

ATOM RSS1 RSS2