Re: Replacing *entry plist

["M. Lazarus" <mlazarus@xxxxxxxx>]

Barbara,

At 3/24/03 06:35 PM, you wrote:
> Mark, prototypes are meant to be used by both calling programs and the
> program itself (so for EXTPGM, the prototype should be in a /copy
> file).  The EXTPGM keyword is really more for the callers anyway, so I
> think it should be hardcoded.  For the program itself, if the command's
> PGM parameter and the EXTPGM parameter are different you just get a sev
> 10 message; the EXTPGM parm is ignored and the program gets created
> exactly the same as if you had the EXTPGM correct.

 I've been thinking about this (and using /COPY in my programs) and have 
come to the conclusion that I'd still like to have the 
EXTPGM(*CURRENT).  Here's why.  I've found that the best compromise between 
flexibility and simplicity is coding like this:

D MyPgm PR              EXTPGM( 'MyRealPgm' )
 /COPY MyRealPgm@

D MyPgm PI
 /COPY MyRealPgm@

 where MyRealPgm@ contains the fields and parm attributes.  This keeps the 
fields in sync, but avoids having to define conditional compiler directives 
to make sure the specific lines (PR vs. PI) get included.  It also helps 
readability, IMHO, when trying to figure out definitively which procedure 
is being called.

 Having EXTPGM(*CURRENT) would document that this is really a replacement 
for *ENTRY PLIST.  Am I missing something major here?

 -mark