|
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 1997-2024 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.