|
Hello Buck, You wrote: >Or that we feel the includes are like Redbook examples - look at them for >an overall view but don't slavishly copy them into production code. This topic probably should be moved but I doubt it wil last long. I don't agree. The includes in QSYSINC should be used as is (unless broken) -- especially the C language ones. The RPGIV ones are just a joke and should be rewritten. The reason I think the C language ones should be used is that they are based on those used by IBM for their own development. The MI includes should be treated no differently from those supplied with the compiler. You would hardly say that <stdio.h> or <netinet/in.h> should not be copied into production code. There is a great deal of difference between the supplied includes and example code. The naming conventions used in the C includes are acceptable and mostly defined correctly so creating your own versions seems a waste of effort. Regards, Simon Coulter. -------------------------------------------------------------------- FlyByNight Software AS/400 Technical Specialists http://www.flybynight.com.au/ Phone: +61 3 9419 0175 Mobile: +61 0411 091 400 /"\ Fax: +61 3 9419 0175 mailto: shc@flybynight.com.au \ / X ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML E-Mail / \ --------------------------------------------------------------------
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.