RE: Prototyped Procedures

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Bob Cozzi
> 
> Opening up the source after "code freeze" for developers to use is not
a
> good idea in my opinion. But if you're a one or two-person shop and
you
> don't worry about other people working with your source, then go for
it.

What does this mean?  I can /COPY a frozen source member or a non-frozen
member.  If you want to "freeze" the source, make it read-only.


> If I did that with RPG xTools, I would have had to have shipped
everyone
> the entire source library rather than just the prototypes.

Yup, that's a valid point for those that sell APIs.  For the vast
majority of folks that don't sell APIs, it's not an issue, and the
simplicity of a single source member might be a bigger issue.  MIGHT be,
Bob.  I'm not saying one way is better, just that either way is fine. 


> To me, though, it is confusing and gimmicky to use this "technique".

A lot confuses you these days, it seems.


> You can
> program-describe your files which is exactly the same thing in my
opinion,
> to putting all the prototypes in the same source member as the
> implementation.

There is zero difference from either a compile-time or runtime checking
standpoint between in-source prototypes and external prototypes, and so
equating it with the difference between external and internal file
descriptions is baseless and erroneous -- just more FUD.


> I'm guessing you're using SEU to edit your code... this
all-in-one-source
> mentality runs rapid in SEU users.

Well, considering I'm one of the early adopters of WDSC, it would appear
that your sweeping generalization is as inaccurate as your previous
comparison.

Joe