×
The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.
Problem with passing pointers is that you can't use prototypes to
defend against incorrect data tpye/length being passed. It is rarely
essential to use pointers unless using a procedure pointer - so why do
it?
I'd rather risk having the internal proto of the router have pointer
type definitions and have multiple protos for callers which define the
way things look. That way there's only one place that requires the
programmer to be aware of what he's doing - and that's the router - as
it should be.
Jon Paris
www.Partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com
On 9-Oct-09, at 10:00 AM, rpg400-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
The boss doesn't like the way the router juggles with the parameters
and organizes 4 different call types.
The argument is, if everyone just passes two pointers and receives
two pointers, you won't have to think about how to pass the
parameters.
Come to think of it, in that case, why not just pass everything with
one pointer instead of 2.
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.
midrange.com
