|
...
Me, I think I'd rather have the compiler tell me I have a prototype mismatch
if I try to pass a small VARYING to a procedure that wants a large VARYING,
and maybe allow the STATIC keyword to auto-copy between them. I certainly
wouldn't want to pass different sized VARYING fields (even with the same
prefix size!) to a procedure if they were updateable -- without a length
parameter, you're just begging for trouble there, since the VARYING field
doesn't actually carry a maximum length, it's just a compiler artifact.
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.