|
Normally I try to stay out of these discussions but I'm curious about something.
As a longtime no /copy bigot I'm still coming to terms with using /copy (or
/include) for prototypes. I have used the method Joe describes (at least I
think it's the same) and I don't see the difference between that and a separate
copybook other than using /define statements. I actually kind of like that
because then I know exactly what is being copied.
For instance:
Module code
/IF prototypename
d Proc pr
d parm1 1a
d parm2 10i 0
/ENDIF
d Proc pi
.
.
.
In calling program
/DEFINE prototypename
/COPY sourcefile/modulesource
/UNDEFINE
With the prototype in a separate member you don't have the define (or maybe you
do if there are many prototypes in a single copybook) so you are left with this:
/COPY sourcefile/modulesource
I just don't see issue with using /DEFINE
Rick
Privileged and Confidential. This e-mail, and any attachments there to, is
intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally
privileged or confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in
error, please notify me immediately by a return e-mail and delete this e-mail.
You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
e-mail and/or any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.