Re: More on RPG style

Scott,

That's true, but by using the return value, he has to have the multiple
RETURNS there in his mainline code (which is the explicit point his
co-worker doesn't like). If he uses subroutines which include the RETURN
op-code, then he won't have multiple RETURN's there in his mainline code.

Like I said, I think his code is perfectly valid, and frankly, I think his
co-worker can go shove it if they don't like it... Maybe that's why I'm not
a politician.

Rory

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Scott Klement <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

Hello,

On 3/1/2010 11:58 AM, Rory Hewitt <rory.hewitt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

If you're not using local variables in the subprocedures, you are

probably

just as well off using (gasp!) subroutines, since each subroutine can
include the return statement:

Just wanted to point out that, not thing else, David was using the
return value of the subprocedure to help control the flow of his
application.

So even though he wasn't using parameters, he was still using one of the
features of subprocedures. Maybe this is just a stepping stone to
ultimately using more of the features down the road... But in any
case, he is getting the benefits of using the procedures directly in an
expression, which is enough to warrant procedures vs. subroutines.

Just an observation.