(j3.2006) [Fwd: C501 in TS 18508]

[Van Snyder]

On Tue Mar 5 05:55:49 MST 2013, John Reid wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 11:59 -0800, Van Snyder wrote:
> > It would be better (i.e., easier to find) if these were constraints on
> > the EXIT and CYCLE statements, not on the change-team construct.  I.e.,
> > part of C821 and C845 in 12-007.
> 
> I don't see why. These are special to the change-team construct.

There are essentially identical "special" constraints on CRITICAL and DO
CONCURRENT constructs.

Since we're constraining against branching, exiting with EXIT, exiting
with CYCLE, and exiting with RETURN, that's 12 "special" constraints.

It would be more efficient to have four of them, one on EXIT, one on
CYCLE, one on RETURN, and one on branching, rathern than twelve of them,
four on CRITICAL, four on DO CONCURRENT, and four on CHANGE TEAM.