RE: CEETSTA API

["Bartell, Aaron L. (TC)" <ALBartell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ah.  Yes that example makes much more sense.  This is just my opinion, but I
would make separate sub procs with a small variation in the name.

<<Aaron begins to dream of the day when RPG gets overloading and overriding
sub procs>>

I will have a party at my place when that day comes;-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Carlos Kozuszko [mailto:ckozuszko@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 1:35 PM
To: rpg400 list (midrange)
Subject: RE: CEETSTA API




Aaron B. wrote:
> I guess I never use CONST, I always use VALUE.  
> What is the reason you are
> using both *Omit and *NoPass? I put together the 
> following and it works fine for me.

Maybe the prototype I posted is not very useful, 
maybe if i code:

DProc             PR              N                   
               
D Parm1            5U 0 ONST
D Parm2            5U 0 CONST OPTIONS(*OMIT: *NOPASS)
D Parm3            5U 0 CONST OPTIONS(*NOPASS)

It would be useful to define the Parm2 as an *Omit
parameter if it's not always required, but giving the
chance to pass a third optional parameter. You can
code:

Callp Proc(1);
Callp Proc(1: 2);
Callp Proc(1: 2: 3);
Callp Proc(1: *omit: 3);

Carlos Kozuszko


------------
Internet GRATIS es Yahoo! Conexión
4004-1010 desde Buenos Aires. Usuario: yahoo; contraseña: yahoo
Más ciudades: http://conexion.yahoo.com.ar
_______________________________________________
This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L) mailing list
To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.