Re: advance=no problem

robert.corbett@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
....
> One problem is that nonadvancing I/O serves more than one role.
> It can be used for prompts, as the OP intended.  It can also be
> used to build records a piece at a time.  In the latter case,
> flu****ng at the end of each WRITE is not only costly in time,
> but it eliminates some functionality (consider tab edit
> descriptors).  [...]

This last is incorrect.  A tab edit descriptor may not be used
of tab to the left of the record's position at the beginning of the
current I/O statement.  The T edit descriptor's number must be
positive and is relative to the "teft tab limit".  The TL edit
descriptor is not allowed to move further back than the
current "left tab limit".  The "left tab limit" is reset by
several things including the start of a new I/O statement.

Flu****ng at the end of each WRITE in no way limits legal
functionality.  But, an implemenmtation may have extended
functionality to consider.  And in any case, nearly everything
about flu****ng is implementation dependent anyway.

-- 
J. Giles

"I conclude that there are two ways of constructing a software
design: One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously
no deficiencies and the other way is to make it so complicated
that there are no obvious deficiencies."   --  C. A. R. Hoare