Statement: PERFORM about typecobol

[wiztigers]

shows an issue about the grammar as written p388.
Is phrase2 mandatory in PERFORM..VARYING ?
Spec says it is, but tests are written as it was not !

I'm waiting for some COBOL expert position to settle this issue. Thanks in advance !

[wiztigers]

By comparing with production code, it really seems phrase2 is NOT mandatory.
66f711f I modified the grammar according to "real" COBOL code.

[wiztigers]

p387 of the spec, there is NO WAY to write PERFORM .. UNTIL without tossing in a THRU. Either you write "PERFORM procedure_1 THROUGH procedure_N UNTIL condition", or you write "PERFORM UNTIL condition imperative_statements".
However, real code contradicts this.

c4e437d I modified the grammar according to "real" COBOL code.

[wiztigers]

PerformStatement should implement FlowControl as was done for IfStatement in 02982b7.

[osmedile]

perform until p387:
Yes it's allowed to write:
perform procedure-name-1 UNTIL condition-1
So specs must be wrong.

[osmedile]

perform varying p388:
phrase 2 is optionnal, it's allowed to write
perform procedure-name-1 varying identifier-2 from identifier-3 BY identifier-4 UNTIL condition-1

[smedilol]

Is there still a problem with PERFORM?

[wiztigers]

It's not as much a problem as a "work in progress" situation.
I'm currently building the syntax tree during the semantic analysis phase (in ProgramClassBuilder), and the PERFORM statement (as long as the other flow control statements such as IF or EVALUATE) must have a correct and tested node construction before our work on these last statements can be considered done.