blocks|key|466698|text|我对COBOL一无所知，但我担心的是，对于不同的COBOL实现，用于WS-SEQ-NO的数据类型可能会有所不同，并且可能会更改大小，从而使自动翻转不再有效。更重要的是，if语句清楚地表明这就是您的意图，而不仅仅是一个偶然的副作用。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|466699|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|C|$]]

I know COBOL from nothing, but my concerns would be that the data type used for WS-SEQ-NO might be different with a different implementation of COBOL, and could change size so that an automatic roll-over would no longer work. More importantly, the if statement makes it perfectly clear that this is what you intend and is not merely an accidental side effect.

blocks|key|1482681|text|我更喜欢看到“将0迁移到WS-SEQ-NO”。依赖于翻转可能并不是在所有平台上都能像预期的那样工作，而且也不是很清楚。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1482682|记住，你要为追随你的人类编写源代码。他们应该看着它，清楚地看到“哦，重置计数器”。|1482683|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

I much prefer to see the "Move 0 to WS-SEQ-NO". Relying on rollover might not work as expected on all platforms, and it simply isn't as clear.

Remember, you write the source code for the humans that come after you. They should look at it and clearly see "oh, reset the counter".

blocks|key|4506555|text|我发现MOVE+0+TO+WS-SEQ-NO方法更清楚您的意图。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|offset|length|style|CODE|entityRanges|data|4506556|请记住，可能有一些编译选项会影响您观察到的截断/翻转行为。例如，在IBM's+Enterprise+COBOL中，如果WS-SEQ-NO被定义为PIC9(4)+COMP，那么编译选项TRUNC(BIN)将在65535处导致截断/滚动，而TRUNC(STD)将显示您当前看到的行为。|4506557|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/cobol-zos|1|https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/cobol-zos/6.3?topic=options-trunc^0|3|J|0|X|M|0|2J|A|1|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|R|8|@$9|S|A|T|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|U|8|@]|D|@$9|V|A|W|1|X]|$9|Y|A|Z|1|10]]|E|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|11|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]]|I|$J|$5|K|L|M|E|$N|O]]|P|$5|K|L|M|E|$N|Q]]]]

I find the <code>MOVE 0 TO WS-SEQ-NO</code> method to be clearer as to your intent.
Something to keep in mind, there may be compile options that affect the truncation/rollover behavior you observe. For example, in <a href="https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/cobol-zos" rel="nofollow noreferrer">IBM's Enterprise COBOL</a>, if WS-SEQ-NO is defined as PIC 9(4) COMP then the compile option <a href="https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/cobol-zos/6.3?topic=options-trunc" rel="nofollow noreferrer">TRUNC(BIN)</a> will cause truncation/rollover at 65535, while TRUNC(STD) will exhibit the behavior you're currently seeing.

blocks|key|4506613|text|我会保留条件并这样定义计数器。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|4506614|01+COUNTERS.
+++03+WS-SEQ-NO++++PIC++9(04).
++++++88+MAX-SEQ-NO+VALUE+9999.
...
IF+MAX-SEQ-NO
++++MOVE+0+TO+WS-SEQ-NO
ELSE
++++ADD+1+TO+WS-SEQ-NO
END-IF.|code-block|syntax|javascript|4506615|如果您需要将计数器修改为PIC+9(5)，您不会忘记修改条件，因为您不必这样做。|offset|length|style|CODE|4506616|你只需要修改88级。|4506617|entityMap^0|0|0|C|8|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|D|7|R|8|@]|9|@]|A|$E|F]]|$1|G|3|H|5|6|7|S|8|@$I|T|J|U|K|L]]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|M|3|N|5|6|7|V|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|O|3|-4|5|6|7|W|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|P|$]]

I would keep the condition and define the counter this way

<pre><code>01 COUNTERS.
 03 WS-SEQ-NO PIC 9(04).
 88 MAX-SEQ-NO VALUE 9999.
...
IF MAX-SEQ-NO
 MOVE 0 TO WS-SEQ-NO
ELSE
 ADD 1 TO WS-SEQ-NO
END-IF.
</code></pre>

If you need to modify your counter to <code>PIC 9(5)</code>, you won't forget to modify the condition because you won't have to.

You'll only need to modify the level 88.

blocks|key|468585|text|如果它起作用了，它就起作用了。但是，将注释添加到工作存储中的程序和程序的循环中，以表明您期望发生翻转，这是所需的结果。我们普通人不会知道，明年当我们对你的程序进行维护时，我们会找到你。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|468586|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|C|$]]

If it works, it works. However, add comments to your program in working-storage and in the program's loop to say that you are expecting rollover to occur and that is the desired outcome. Us mortals won't know that next year when we are doing maintenance to your program and we will hunt you down.

I want to know what is the better way to reset a counter.
I have the following:

<pre><code>03 WS-SEQ-NO PIC 9(04).
</code></pre>

When WS-SEQ-NO is 9999, and i increment it, or if i move 10000 into it, it will get truncated, and become 0000. This is actually the desired result as i want it to tick over to 0000 after 9999. However, i am interested to know if this is acceptable by COBOL programming standards? Or should i be using an IF condition to reset it. E.g:

<pre><code>IF WS-SEQ-NO = 9999
 MOVE 0 TO WS-SEQ-NO
ELSE
 ADD 1 TO WS-SEQ-NO
END-IF.
</code></pre>

Also, this code will only be executed once a month or so, and it is not in a loop, so i'm not desperate to avoid having the additional IF condition. I'm merely wondering if it is 'legal', so to speak, in a programming standards sense, to rely on this COBOL feature that truncates the number rather than coding for it.
Thanks!

Correct way to reset counter in COBOL

翻译质量差，导致语言生硬或混乱。

没有提供实际的解决方法或示例。

解答不清晰，无法理解或解决问题。

页面排版不美观，阅读体验差。

文章

问答

视频

学习中心

腾讯云实验室

直播

竞赛

腾讯云代码分析专区

腾讯iOA零信任安全管理系统专区

腾讯云架构师技术同盟交流圈

腾讯云数据库专区

腾讯云顾问专区

腾讯云原生专区

腾讯混元专区

腾讯云TCE专区

腾讯云Lighthouse专区

腾讯云HAI专区

腾讯云Edgeone专区

腾讯云存储专区

腾讯云智能专区

腾讯轻联专区 

腾讯云开发专区

TAPD专区

腾讯轻量云游戏服专区

腾讯云最具价值专家

腾讯云架构师技术同盟

腾讯云创作之星

腾讯云开发者先锋

腾讯云代码助手

云原生构建

TAPD 敏捷项目管理

Cloud Studio

SDK中心

API中心

命令行工具

涵盖代码开发、场景应用、自动测试全流程，助你从零构建专属AI助手

一站式MCP教程库，解锁AI应用新玩法

我想知道重置计数器的更好方法是什么。我有以下几点：03 WS-SEQ-NO    PIC  9(04).当WS-SEQ-NO为99999时，我递增它，或者如果我将10000移入其中，它将被截断，并变为0000。这实际上是我想要的结果，因为我希望它在9999之后滴答到0000。但是，我想知道COBOL编程标准是否可以接受...

问COBOL中重置计数器的正确方法
EN

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问COBOL中重置计数器的正确方法EN