RE: *omit

["Sims, Ken" <KSIMS@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Scott -

>I like the 2nd syntax a lot better...  tho even better yet 
>would be something like *PASSED that worked for both 
>options(*nopass) and options(*omit).
>
>Of course, since the second syntax isn't valid, and CEETSTA 
>is a pain in the butt (damned thing should RETURN a value!!) 
>I use the %addr()<>*NULL.

Unfortunately %addr() <> *null cannot be used with a procedure parameter
that is coded as 
CONST OPTIONS(*OMIT)
The compiler complains because you are not allowed access to the address of
a CONST parameter since CONST parameters are not permitted to be modified.
The compiler should allow a comparison to *null, but it doesn't.

Hans or Barbara, is that something that could be done to the V5R1 compiler,
to allow the comparison of the address of a CONST parameter to *null to see
if has been passed?  A %passed BIF would be even better, that would check
both the number of parameters and the address, but I'll settle for being
able to check the address for *null.

Ken
Southern Wine and Spirits of Nevada, Inc.
Opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of
my employer or anyone in their right mind.

+---
| 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
+---