|
> From: James Rich > > > > If I'm debugging, I had better be able to see the source code of the > > modules I'm calling. > > Huh?? How is this even relevant? Because the point of keeping them separate was to keep people from seeing the source. If you're seeing the source anyway, the original argument was moot. Clear? > True, but why needlessly force a DEFINE on people? It's not "needless". It's simply the way to include the prototype while keeping the prototype in the source. > > "much cleaner"? How? > > Cleaner because when you copy those members in, you do so to access the > function definitions. Requiring the additional step of DEFINE is simply > tedious. I think this is a bit nitpicky. You want to get rid of something useless, please get rid of those stupid semicolons in /free. > I think I see your point here. It may well be that the best current > solution is the one you suggest. But it appears to me that this solution > is a work around for the lack of data type definitions in RPG (i.e. > typedef). But that is RPG's fault, not yours. Yes and no. I really do some very neat stuff with this. For example, in my I/O procedures I can specify (via another /DEFINE) in my calling program the maximum number of records to return and the prototype builds all the structures for me, which I then pass to the callee. Different programs can then allocate only the amount of memory they find necessary. Joe
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.