Re: Same prefixes (was Re: It's That Time Again! etc.)

[Scott Klement <klemscot@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

My shop is also one of those shops that uses a 2-char prefix on all field
names, not only from PFs but from display files, internal work variables,
ICF files and print files as well.

I completely agree with you about dropping the prefix having it's own
set of problems.  In fact, I'd say that it has too many problems to make
it useful to me.

A *MUCH* better solution would be to have a way of telling EVALC to
ignore the prefix only for the action of copying from one data structure
to another.

The idea is that the fields retain their original names throughout the
program, and the first two letters (or whatever) are dropped ONLY for
the purposes of matching up which fields are considered "corresponding"
by the EVALC op-code.


On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, Richard B Baird wrote:
>
> on the other hand, using some sort of drop-prefix has it's own set of
> problems.  once you drop a prefix, then all fields from different files get
> changed if one gets changed - whether you intend it to or not - which
> negates the need for a move-corresponding, again, unless you use prefix()
> and qualified at the ds level instead of the file level, and do the move to
> datastructure after read and back before update.
>