Re: Are indicators evil creatures or victims of poor shop standards?

["James W. Kilgore" <qappdsn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Buck,

I agree that indicators are not -evil-, just a pain.

Since we must us indicators for such things as position cursor for a display
file, they live on.

We have strong shop standards and have not found indicators to be a particular
problem.  Our standard is that a given indicator has a particular meaning or a
set of rules.  The only reason it works is through enforced uniformity.

Here's a small example: Every file in the application has a 'get record' routine
that does a CHAIN.  Since we have to support V3R2 RPGIII, this routine is in a
/COPY member.  Every, and I mean every, incarnation of this routine uses *IN90 
as
the resulting indicator.

These routines then uses *IN90 to set flags (variables) that are used within the
mainline code.  The rule for *IN90 is that it's use never goes beyond the
immediate purpose, flags are set instead.

You're right, without a plan, indicators are a mess.

Buck Calabro wrote:

>
>
> Global variables pretty much require strong shop standards; it is the lack
> of shop standards that has resulted in messy code, and it is messy code
> which has given indicators a bad name.  If you have strong shop standards,
> please PLEASE post them for the common good!
>
> Buck Calabro
> Aptis; Albany, NY
>

+---
| 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
+---