RE: CONST vs. VALUE

And that's why i asked here.  i saw a lot of people in their examples using
CONST.  I have almost always used VALUE.  Mainly so that I don't have to
match field sizes and can pass literals, especially for testing.

Since I never looked into using CONST, I never knew what it did.  

I appreciate everyone's responses!

Brad

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joep Beckeringh [mailto:joep@beckeringh.myweb.nl]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 1:47 PM
> To: RPG400-L@midrange.com
> Subject: Re: CONST vs. VALUE
> 
> 
> Brad,
> 
> One practical difference (the technical difference should be 
> clear by now):
> 
> If you pass a parameter by value, you are free to change the variable
> defined by the procedure interface (you might want to change blanks to
> zeroes, double quotes, strip leading zeroes).  For a CONST 
> parameter you
> would have to copy to a local variable first.
> 
> BTW: the discussion shows that the manual is not very clear 
> about WHY you
> should use one or another.  In fact I had to read the 
> explanation a few
> times to understand the technical difference.
> 
> Joep Beckeringh
> 
> 
> +---
> | 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
> +---
> 
+---
| 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
+---