Re: What bugs you about KLISTs in RPG IV?

Hans,

>So todays questions are:  Would you take advantage of this if
>available?  Would you still use KLISTs?

I too would *much* prefer this syntax to KLISTS, and as far as I am
concerned, would eliminate the need for allowing KLIST definitions in
D-specs.

I think this is a much more readable (and therefore maintainable)
method than KLISTS, which have always bothered me as one of RPG's
limitations.

I had even toyed with a similar syntax when testing moving I/O to
prototyped subprocedures.  For Chains, I allowed a variable number of
parameters and selected a KLIST based on the number of fields passed.
It still allowed me to use expressions etc for the field value(s).

You're terrific Hans!  Boy I wish we had this kind of response when
the early decisions were being made on RPG IV design.

Better late than never.  RPG may become my favorite language again
yet.

Doug
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* This is the RPG/400 Discussion Mailing List!  To submit a new         *
* message, send your mail to "RPG400-L@midrange.com".  To unsubscribe   *
* from this list send email to MAJORDOMO@midrange.com and specify       *
* 'unsubscribe RPG400-L' in the body of your message.  Questions should *
* be directed to the list owner / operator: david@midrange.com          *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *