RE: New parameter needed for a subprocedure

I wasn't going to chime in but.....

[Argument:]

3) Modern languages, like Java, cannot return output through their
parameter list. If you want your RPG code to be modern, you shouldn't

return data through the parameter list, either.

[Sharon's Response:]
Are you kidding? In some ways Java and C, and C# (which I do code in)
allow you to send in a reference and allow you to change the data in the
"other routine". Therefore, IMO it is worse since it can change memory
locations. At least passing parameters by reference can keep the rest
of your variables "safe".

Been more than once that I have had to debug C or C# to find the hidden
& reference that killed the entire routine.

This type of fallacious argument is ......



-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Adam Glauser
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 2:58 PM
To: rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: New parameter needed for a subprocedure

Scott Klement wrote:
[Argument:]

3) Modern languages, like Java, cannot return output through their
parameter list. If you want your RPG code to be modern, you shouldn't

return data through the parameter list, either.

[Scott's response:]

3) All programming languages have their quirks. The best policy is to

take advantage of the best features of each, rather than restricting
yourself to only using techniques that are available in all languages.

I find it hard to believe that the way you pass parameters will make
your code more or less "modern". Instead, do what's practical in the
language you're working in, rather than making things more difficult

in

the name of "being more like Java."

That's much more eloquent (and polite) than what my response would be,
but mine's only 8 letters! :D