Re: RPG overloading (was RPGV?)

[Scott Klement <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Isn't that what Barbara was suggesting?

Just like the way CONST works now, the compiler generates code to 
convert the data to whatever is specified on the prototype.  The only 
diff between this and the existing CONST support is that it'd be 
roundtrip -- i.e. not just converted on input, but converted on output 
as well.

But it'd still be converted automatically by determining the type needed.

Obviously there'd have to be SOME SORT of keyword on the prototype 
itself, otherwise you'd break backward compatibility.  But I don't think 
she was suggesting that it require you to specify the from/to variable 
types.


Mark Murphy/STAR BASE Consulting Inc. wrote:
> And if this were all automatic, no special keywords necessary, the compiler just determines the type needed based on the parameters passed on the call, that would be even better.
>
> Mark Murphy
> STAR BASE Consulting, Inc.
> mmurphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> -----rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: -----
>
> To: RPG programming on the IBM i / System i <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> From: Scott Klement <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: 01/13/2010 02:14PM
> Subject: Re: RPG overloading (was RPGV?)
>
> That would definitely work better than overloading in this case!
>
> Barbara Morris wrote:
> > What would solve this problem would be a new style of pass-by-reference 
> > parameter, where the compiler would create a temporary of the type 
> > required by the prototype.  It would assign the passed parameter to the 
> > temporary before the call, pass the temporary to the procedure, and then 
> > assign the temporary back to the passed parameter after the call.