RE: Meaningful Procedure names

[boldt@xxxxxxxxxx]

Dan wrote:
>O.K. Hans, you basically let the cat out of the bag.  'Fess up!
>
>Why in the world are RPG-IV field name lengths capped at 4096?
>
>Lessee,
>
>The_time_the_record_was_last_changed_by_someone_other_than_the_user_who_crea

>ted_the_record (90)
>
>Supercalifragilisticaspialadocious (34)
>
>Now_is_the_time_for_all_good_men_to_come_to_the_aid_of_their_country (68)
>
>I_just_had_to_try_an_extra_long_field_name_to_expand_my_horizons_and_just_to

>_see_if_it_would_work_without_regard_to_the_fact_that_it_will_drive_the_next

>_person_that_has_to_maintain_this_piece_of_@#$@_absolutely_insane_and_curse_

>my_very_existence (245)
>
>Nope, just can't see it.  Except maybe the last one.  (I'm just that kind
of
>guy ;-) )
>
>What requirements?  C'mon, no deferring!

SOM.

>What "other (ahem) issues"?

Ancient history now.  Just certain "non-technical" issues
that were resolved shortly after that release.  (No, I
won't go into details.)

>
>I caught the piece yesterday where you use '...' to specify a name longer
>than what fits in the normal d-spec space.  How do you code a long name on
a
>CX-spec?

The same way you'd code it on an EVAL statement, with '...'.
But then, since you'd have more room to code stuff on a
free-form calc spec, you'd be less likely to need continuation
anyways.

Cheers!  Hans   (trying hard to restore a serious tone to this
mailing list!)

Hans Boldt, ILE RPG Development, IBM Toronto Lab, boldt@ca.ibm.com


+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---