RE: Re[2]: Value vs. Const

["Mike Haston ** Data" <MHaston@xxxxxxx>]

Wow, I'm starting to understand that I didn't know what I was doing all this 
time!  But it works out the way I'd rather it.  I wondered why when I declared 
something in the procedure interface as CONST, why I couldn't work with that 
variable in my procedure.  At least change it's value.  Now I understand.

But it turns out I'd prefer that way.  I like sending a procedure something and 
getting something back.  I'd rather not change the parms in most cases.  I 
always used CONST because I thought that was the way to send a literal or 
variable.


-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Klement [mailto:klemscot@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 5:33 PM
To: RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Value vs. Const



On Sat, 9 Aug 2003, Joep  Beckeringh wrote:
> The CONST in the procedure interface is different, of course; the compiler
> checks that the procedure doesn't change the parameter.

Hi Joep,

I thought we were talking about a procedure interface??