IBM Mainframe Forum

Actually, coding the "EXIT." in place of "STOP RUN." is not a completely wrong statement as you suggest. It's good coding practice and it will remove the warning message (not error message as you mention twice) that the original poster was asking about.

Thanks.

Robert Sample wrote:You said

The P9999-ABEND PERFORM " CANNOT REACH ITS EXIT " because you do not have an "EXIT." Statement.

and this is a completely wrong statement. You have missed the concept here -- the error message is NOT because the EXIT is missing (it is not required) but because the STOP RUN inteferes with the PERFORM code. Saying "becuase you do not have" is just plain wrong. The EXIT statement has nothing to do with the error. Certainly it is good coding practice to have an EXIT (or CONTINUE) in the exit paragraph -- but it is NOT required to do so.

I did NOT say

Actually, coding the "EXIT." in place of "STOP RUN." is not a completely wrong statement as you suggest.

What I specifically said is that YOUR statement about the error being due to not having an EXIT statement is wrong -- and it is. Do not confuse good coding practices with COBOL requirements -- it may be a good coding practice to include an EXIT statement in the exit paragraph of a PERFORM statement but it will not cause any warning or error or informational message by omitting the EXIT.

Considering the problem has devolved to a terminology issue and the original question has been answered, this topic is being locked.

c62ap90 wrote:The P9999-ABEND PERFORM " CANNOT REACH ITS EXIT " because you do not have an "EXIT." Statement.
Change "STOP RUN." to "EXIT."

Nope, this is wrong. You are confusing the word "exit" used in the diagnostic message and the Cobol verb EXIT.

To argue for the use of THRU for clarity when it comes to all this is ironic

To argue that something different was said than what was said is odd, but there we go.

Much confusion can be avoided through not using PERFORM ... THRU ... with one/more paragraphs plus an "exit paragraph", but in many sites that is not possible. If the local standard says do it, then follow the standard (as in everything else). But it buys you nothing but a false sense of security.