See the discussion of conditional statements versus imperative statements in
the COBOL manual: http://docs.hp.com/cgi-bin/doc3k/B3150090013.11820/59
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tracy Pierce" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 4:21 PM
Subject: Re: Bizarre Cobol Error
> Excellent observation, Ken, re next verb ending INSPECT. I was going to
> offer that as a possibility, but I'm sure not about to go to the trouble
to
> test it extensively! Does your rationale appear in any official
> documentation?
>
> Tracy Pierce
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ken Hirsch [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 12:50 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Bizarre Cobol Error
> >
> >
> > END-COMPUTE is there because COMPUTE has an ON SIZE ERROR exception
> > condition that can contain other statements.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Shahan, Ray" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 3:25 PM
> > Subject: Re: Bizarre Cobol Error
> >
> >
> > > Not so, look at the COMPUTE command, it shares the same
> > situation with the
> > > INSPECT command (another verb ends the statement), but the
> > COMPUTE command
> > > has an END-COMPUTE. The INSPECT statement should have and
> > END-INSPECT for
> > > the same reason the other verbs do....style.
> > >
> > > The END-VERB construct has never been, and is not now
> > required...it simply
> > > helps code readability, and in many cases, makes it a hell
> > of a lot easier
> > > to write the code (especially when in maintenance mode).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Ken Hirsch [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 1:49 PM
> > > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > > Subject: Re: Bizarre Cobol Error
> > > >
> > > > There is no END-INSPECT because none is needed. The use
> > of any verb
> > will
> > > > begin the next statement. You've never needed a period to end an
> > INSPECT
> > > > statement.
> > > >
> > > > The only verbs that need END- tags are the ones that can
> > contain other
> > > > statements, either because they are flow control constructs
> > > > (IF,PERFORM,EVALUATE) or because they have exception
> > condition (AT END,
> > ON
> > > > SIZE ERROR).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Shahan, Ray" <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 1:46 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: Bizarre Cobol Error
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Yes, END-INSPECT is a good candidate for enhancement.
> > Since I don't
> > > > have
> > > > > ready access to the ANSII COBOL standards manual, I
> > have to assume
> > that
> > > > it's
> > > > > not supported by hp, because it ain't supported by ANSII.
> > > > >
> > > > > As for the complexity of use...I think it's a double
> > edged sword...it
> > > > does
> > > > > take some reading/understanding to use INSPECT
> > correctly because of
> > all
> > > > of
> > > > > the options the command has, but those command options
> > also make the
> > > > INSPECT
> > > > > command a very robust command.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ray Shahan
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Tracy Pierce [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 12:36 PM
> > > > > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > > > > Subject: FW: Bizarre Cobol Error
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I privately replied to Ray...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I was about to say I thought INSPECT was no longer
> > 'in thar',
> > > > > > > but that's clearly wrong. Are you sure there's no
> > > > > > > END-INSPECT (it sure isn't doc'd in the manual)? I think
> > > > > > > THAT would be a valid enhancement request, don't you?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ...before realizing that his reply to me was on-list.
> > Ten minutes
> > > > later,
> > > > > > oh
> > > > > > yeah - EXAMINE was replaced by INSPECT. So WHY no
> > END-INSPECT?
> > Could
> > > > it
> > > > > > have been overlooked? Could it be that the code
> > behind INSPECT is
> > so
> > > > > > horrible nobody got around to rewriting it? Or that its
> > > > implementation
> > > > > > was
> > > > > > already so buggy that rewriting it would have broken
> > a good portion
> > of
> > > > > > existing usage? Does this seem like a valid SIGCOBOL issue?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For my money, when an INSPECT candidate situation occurs, I've
> > always
> > > > > > found
> > > > > > a way around having to integrate (or maybe just
> > read?) the NINE
> > pages
> > > > of
> > > > > > prose documentation covering its operation into my programs by
> > simply
> > > > > > writing my own loops, hopefully more straightforward.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tracy (always hated INSPECT) Pierce
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PS: my minimal-periods strategy still would have caught the
> > > > missing-space
> > > > > > problem!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: Shahan, Ray [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 9:28 AM
> > > > > > > > To: Tracy Pierce; Shahan, Ray; [log in to unmask]
> > > > > > > > Subject: RE: Bizarre Cobol Error
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I can think of a spot where no periods might
> > sting...the INSPECT
> > > > > > > > statement...I've always wondered why they didn't do an
> > > > END-INSPECT?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > > From: Tracy Pierce [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 11:26 AM
> > > > > > > > > To: 'Shahan, Ray'; [log in to unmask]
> > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: Bizarre Cobol Error
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > everybody's right on the money with this one,
> > including Ray,
> > > > who's
> > > > > > > > > assuming
> > > > > > > > > that the prior paragraph was PERFORMed.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I generally avoid problems like this by
> > avoiding the use of
> > > > > > > > the other
> > > > > > > > > "paragraph" indicator, which is the period (.). That
> > > > > > > > normally ends a
> > > > > > > > > sentence, but is really only necessary at the end of a
> > > > > > > > paragraph. Not
> > > > > > > > > using
> > > > > > > > > periods to end sentences will also force you to use
> > > > > > > > cobol-85 constructs
> > > > > > > > > such
> > > > > > > > > as END-IF, a very good thing.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Tracy Pierce
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > > > From: Shahan, Ray [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 9:16 AM
> > > > > > > > > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Bizarre Cobol Error
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Actually, it will GOBACK to calling paragraph at
> > > > > > > > > > perform1020-put-record.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Ray Shahan
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > > > > From: Curt Brimacomb [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2001 10:06 AM
> > > > > > > > > > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: Bizarre Cobol Error
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Michael,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > never thought about that one. Things that
> > make you go
> > > > > > > > > > hhhmmmmmm......
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the enlightenment!
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > curt
> > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > You intended to PERFORM a paragraph name
> > 1020-put-record,
> > > > > > > > > > instead you
> > > > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > > a NEW Paragraph named 'perform1020-put-record'.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > This will compile clean, but will not perform
> > > > > > > > > > 1020-put-record as you
> > > > > > > > > > > intended it to, instead it will fall
> > through to perform
> > > > > > > > > > > 1220-lock-next-set.
> > > > > > > > > > > Probably not the results you were looking for.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > Michael -
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> Curt Brimacomb
> > <[log in to unmask]> 06/27/01
> > > > > > > > 09:40AM >>>
> > > > > > > > > > > I just had a very bizarre Cobol error.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I was redoing paragraph names in the
> > source code. I
> > > > > > > > > > accidentally lost a
> > > > > > > > > > > space after the word "perform" on one
> > line and ended up
> > > > > > > > > > with something
> > > > > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > > > this:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > perform1020-put-record.
> > > > > > > > > > > perform 1220-lock-next-set.
> > > > > > > > > > > move "update" to status.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 1000-next-para.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > the program complied with no errors, but
> > would not run
> > > > > > > > > > right. I added
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > one space back into the "bad" perform
> > line. It still
> > > > > > > > > > compiled with no
> > > > > > > > > > > errors, but now does run correctly.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Why did it compile with the missing space
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > * To join/leave the list, search archives,
> > change list
> > > > > > > > settings, *
> > > > > > > > > > > * etc., please visit
> > > > > > > http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list
> > settings,
> > > > *
> > > > > > > > > * etc., please visit
> > http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html
> > > > *
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * To join/leave the list, search archives, change
> > list settings, *
> > > > > > * etc., please visit
> http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
> > > >
> > > > * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> > > > * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
> > >
> > > * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> > > * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
> >
> > * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> > * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
> >
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>
> * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
> * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
