Re: Defining DS to retrieve variable length data from API

Rory Hewitt wrote:
> I understand the first point (even though I'd like to think my naming is
> sufficiently understandable that it's pretty easy to correlate field
names
> to the textual names in the documentation), but as for skipping
meaningless
> fields, I just don't bother naming them, so they're effectively skipped
> anyway...
>

I meant that it's easier to correlate the exact RPG position to the
documented position. Even if your names are identical to the names in
the documentation, say Length_of_message_returned, it can be difficult
for a human to verify that a particular subfield is at the right
position if all the subfields just follow each other. (Maybe it's just
me, since I sometimes can't even add 2 and 3 and get 6, but I find it
difficult to add up the lengths of more than about ten subfields before
I start to waver.)