Exit Method Loop

[former_member2492]

Hi all,

How can I exit a method in class from another method?

lets say I have the following:

method x.
loop at record into data(ls_record).
 me->check()."do smth inside here and if conditions are not met,continue with the next record
endloop.
endmethod.

Please let me know!

[former_member2492]

Your question implies that you want to exit method 'x'. But your comment next to check() method says that you want to continue to the next record in the loop without exiting the method x.. Or did I misunderstood the question?

[maheshpalavalli]

Your question implies that you want to exit method 'x'. But your comment next to check() method says that you want to continue to the next record in the loop without exiting the method x.. Or did I misunderstood the question?

[FredericGirod]

simple is always better

class ... definition ...
  methods check
    returning
      value(result) type abap_bool.
endclass.



class ... implentation.
method check.
  result = cond #( when sun->is_shining( ) eq abap_true then abap_true else abap_false).
endmethod.


method x.
loop at record into data(ls_record).
 check me->check() eq abap_true.
endloop.
endmethod.
endclass.

[matt]

740 SP8, you don't need the eq abap_true

LOOP AT record into data(ls_record).
  check the_record_has_passed_the_check( ls_record ).
ENDLOOP.

[matt]

Funny thing - the clean code group don't like check, but I think it makes things clearer. Also, if you've got multiple checks - don't AND them together. It makes debugging harder - you can't figure out instantly which one failed - and in my view it's less clear.

CHECK does_it_pass_this_condition( ).
CHECK does_it_pass_that_condition( ).
CHECK does_it_pass_the_other_condition( ).

[FredericGirod]

Agree

but ... your CHECKs have to be in a global CHECK method. Otherwise your method has several responsibilities.

and in clean code we have to used:

LOOP AT record REFERENCE INTO data(o_record).
  check the_record_has_passed_the_check( o_record->* ).
ENDLOOP.

but I am not sure all developers could understand this.

[former_member2492]

maheshkumar.palavalli no you are correct

[Sandra_Rossi]

I prefer to use IS_OKAY instead of CHECK so that the code is easier to understand (EDIT: "IF subject verb comparison" is better than "IF verb is true"):

CHECK me->is_okay( ) = abap_true.

or

IF me->is_okay( ) = abap_false.
  CONTINUE.
ENDIF.

You may also use Predicative Method Call since 7.40 SP 8:

CHECK me->is_okay( ).

or

IF NOT me->is_okay( ).
  CONTINUE.
ENDIF.

[FredericGirod]

I assume you used IS_<something>_OKAY ? otherwise CHECK or IS_OKAY are not clean code, We don't know what is OK or not

[Sandra_Rossi]

frdric.girod I agree that IS_OKAY is not good enough, but I don't know what is in OP's mind, I just think that "IF subject verb comparison" is better than "IF verb is true".

[former_member2492]

both answers are correct,thank you,I have upvoted your answer also