Re: Prototypes in Module Source

Rory Hewitt wrote:

Scott,

I have to agree with you - I've never liked coding DEFINEs in my program
source - I like to be able to simply code COPYs. Plus, I like the fact that
if you have a separate prototype copybook, you can include lots of comments
about *how* the procedure should be called, possible return values etc.,
whilst leaving the actual procedure code as a black-box. This is especially
true for shipped software.

If you are distributing callable black box APIs, there's no question that separate copy members is the way to go. I don't work that way, and I prefer to have the code in one place, so I use the DEFINE method. Only one member to open, only one place to make changes. Although WDSC makes it easier, having to open and edit two different source members just to make a change in a protoype is cumbersome to me. Of course, that's just my opinion. And it doesn't do you any good for CL, because there's no parallel approach.

So, I suspect I'm in the minority and that my particular preference is probably not the correct one for most folks.

Joe