Re: Help with parameter passing

Barbara,

Why is it that it is "better" this way?
This way (using *OMIT) is how I do it, but why would it be better?

-Bob

> 
> "DeLong, Eric" wrote:
> > 
> > So far so good.  Now the problem.  The use of this api states:
> > 
> > "Total tax amount for the transaction. This parameter is used
when
> > processing special (tax-only debit and tax-only credit)
> transactions. This
> > parameter is ignored if NULL is passed. Passing 0 results in zero
> tax being
> > calculated."
> > 
> > Entended amount is fine, since we will have a calculated value
for
> that
> > every time we call the api.  But for the call to work properly,
we
> must send
> > the other parm as NULL.  How in the he!! am I supposed to do
that?
>  Does C
> > consider a parm to be null if the address is null?
> > 
> 
> Eric, while the others' suggestion of changing the prototype to be
a
> pointer and passing *NULL will work, I think it's better to
> prototype it
> as a float, with OPTIONS(*OMIT), and then pass *OMIT for null.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L)
> mailing list
> To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
> or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.