Re: Benefits of declaring literals in D-specs

Kent,

I like the fact that you can give the litterals a more descriptive name.

We have an application where we have attributes, keyed by number.

To use them in our RPG programs, we pull in a /copy member with the
constants:

d ....
d attr_concept c 108
d attr_color1 c 109
d attr_color2 c 110
d attr_color3 c 111
d attr_color4 c 112
d attr_freetext c 113
d attr_gadgets c 114
d attr_stackID c 115
d attr_inserttype...
d c 116
d attr_handle c 117
d attr_size c 118
d attr_bulbtype c 119
d attr_dimension1...
d c 120
d attr_dimension2...
d c 121
d attr_dimension3...
d c 122
d ....

I find "attr_dimension1" easier to remember than "120".

Could be my age showing, though ;-)

HTH,

Peter Colpaert
Application Developer
PLI - IT - Kontich, Belgium
-----
Yoda of Borg are we. Futile is resistance, assimilated will you be.
-----



"Kent Hohlen" <khohlen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
03/05/2007 15:05
Please respond to
RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>


To
"RPG400 (E-mail)" <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc

Subject
Benefits of declaring literals in D-specs






We are in the process of revamping our coding standards. Eons ago (and I
still see it today) I saw a few presenters declare all literals in the
D-specs. One presenter explained why he liked declaring literals this
way,
though I don't remember the reasons given. Now I have been asked to
compile
a list of reasons/benefits for declaring literals in the D-specs. If
there
are some real benefits to declaring literals this way, then we will make
it
part of our standards. If you would be so kind to share your thoughts, I
would appreciate it.

Kent Hohlen
Eagle Window & Door