RE: Parameter prototype question

Thanks Birgitta,

We have exactly the same set up in all our RPGLE which is interesting to see.
This was partly the source of the problem. We are so used to using standard naming that the prototype can easily be written without looking up any names. Just one field on the called procedures prototype had a hard coded 9,0 definition where the programmer had not used the standard for some reason. The call to the procedure was not picked up in unit testing. It was found by an integration test where the call failed 1 one out of about 300000 clients.

-----Message d'origine-----
De : rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] De la part de Birgitta Hauser
Envoyé : vendredi 14 mai 2010 17:05
À : 'RPG programming on the IBM i / System i'
Objet : AW: Parameter prototype question

Hi David,

what do you think about using a field reference file and
define all your fields (parameter fields, work fields, file
fields ... etc) with like based on this reference?
That's the way we work. When changing a reference field
everything must be recompiled but we do not care about anything else.

The field reference file is included as external based data
structure (we are not yet on release 6.1 so we cannot use the
keyword TEMPLATE), in every RPG source member we use. All
Fields are refeneced:

Example
D/If not defined (FldRef)
D/Define FldRef
D FldRef E DS
ExtName('MYFLDREF') qualified
D Based(DummyPtr)
D/EndIf

D MyProc PR
D ParAAA Like(FldRef.AAA) Const
D POutCCC Like(FldRef.CCC)
D ParBBB Like(FldRef.BBB) Const
D Options(*NoPass)

D MyVarAAA S Like(FldRef.AAA)

D MyDS DS Qualified
D XXX Like(FldRef.XXX)
D YYY Like(FldRef.YYY)

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards

Birgitta Hauser

"Shoot for the moon, even if you miss, you'll land among the
stars." (Les
Brown)
"If you think education is expensive, try ignorance." (Derek
Bok) "What is worse than training your staff and losing them?
Not training them and keeping them!"

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von David FOXWELL
Gesendet: Friday, 14. May 2010 16:31
An: RPG programming on the IBM i / System i
Betreff: RE: Parameter prototype question

-----Message d'origine-----
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] De la part de Simon Coulter


Pah! The compiler can't protect you from stupidity. The problem was
caused entirely by you trying to stuff 9 pounds in a 7

pound bag and

not expecting it to overflow i.e., not paying attention to what you
were doing. Sure, without CONST or VALUE the compiler would have
caught the mismatch but consider the reverse situation

where you might

want to pass a smaller value or a different data type or a literal;

I don't need to consider the reverse situation here. Its just
a simple case as with most of our procedure calls of wanting
to pass a variable from one procedure to another and wanting
the compiler to check that for me. If you're saying that I
should have checke the attributs of each of the 20 or so
parameters myself then what's the point of having a compiler
that is capable of checking?
--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i / System i
(RPG400-L) mailing list To post a message email:
RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change
list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.


--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i / System i
(RPG400-L) mailing list
To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.