|
I thought I would read in the data area in my main procedure
and then directly call a subprocedure with CONST on the parameter
to protect my data area.
However, from experience I've noticed that it is still possible to modify
the parameter inadvertently, and we have already discussed this.
Someone said that CONST in reality only means that the parameter
is not INTENDED to be changed.
So, I just thought it was a bit ironic : normally, I use CONST on all
parameters
used for input. But now that I REALLY don't want my parameter to be
changed,
I shall code VALUE instead.
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.