RE: Benefits of Sub-procedures

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Barbara Morris
> 
> Andy, you can write your program to /copy in the prototype and use a
> procedure interface instead of the *ENTRY PLIST.  Then you get the
same
> parameter checking as with procedures.

I'm very close to this today, Barbara.  I'd like to replace *ENTRY PLIST
with prototypes.  From what I can find on the list, that's as easy as:

1. Create a prototype using EXTPGM in a /copy
2. Include that in both calling and called programs
3. Use a PI with the name of the program in the called program

Now, I have a minor issue with this.  Right now, I have stopped labeling
PI statements (and the procedure end statements).  Instead, the only
place I specify the name of a procedure is in the procedure begin
statement.  This seems to be fine syntactically, and it replaces a lot
of ugly drudgework when cloning prototypes.

But it seems that in this case, I MUST use the name in the PI statement.

Am I understanding this stuff correctly?

Joe