RE: SQL and RPG Parameter Handling

["Dennis Lovelady" <iseries@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

What more do I need?  Got any spare money?

Thanks for this; it seems to be what we'd been seeking, and so much better
than "I think" and "I believe" and "it makes sense...."

Dennis Lovelady
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dennislovelady
--
"I'm living so far beyond my income that we may almost be said to be living
apart."
        -- e e cummings 


> The answer can be found in the V5R4 InfoCenter here:
>
>
> http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/iseries/v5r4/topic/sqlp/rbafyp
> assarguments.htm
>
> It's right there in the first sentence of the first paragraph, where it
> says "parameters are passed to an external function by address."
>
> What more do you need?
>
>  > On 7/30/2010 11:10 PM, Dennis Lovelady wrote:
> > I would argue that my point is more relevant than yours, since yours
> is
> > based neither on SQL nor on the ILE (Service Program / Module) model.
> But
> > that's opinion - completely immaterial, and that brings us back to
> Matt's
> > original plea (and my echo) for SQL reference that will put the
> discussion
> > to rest.
> >
> > (Yes, sadly, that is one unwieldy sentence.  You could fix it.  :))
> >
> > Dennis Lovelady
> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/dennislovelady
> > --
> > "If you tell the truth you don't have to remember anything."
> >          -- Mark Twain
> >
> >
> >
> > > But, there is no SQL syntax, as far as I am aware, to declare which
> > > parameters should be "pass by value" and which ones should be "pass
> by
> > > reference". -- you can only state "PARAMETER STYLE GENERAL" and that
> > > applies to the whole stored procedure. So, I don't think your point
> > > about service programs vs. programs matters? :-o
> > >
> > > Mark
> > >
> > >   >  On 7/30/2010 8:38 PM, Dennis Lovelady wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm not Matt, but...
> > > >
> > > > I would agree if it weren't for the fact that UDF interfaces use
> > > service
> > >
> > > > programs and modules.  The fact that *PGM objects are called only
> by
> > > > reference, is immaterial.
> > > >
> > > > Dennis Lovelady
> > > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/dennislovelady
> > > > --
> > > > "The most remarkable thing about my mother is that for thirty years
> > > she
> > >
> > > > served the family nothing but leftovers.  The original meal has
> never
> > > >
> > > been
> > >
> > > > found."
> > > >           -- Calvin Trillin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > I am pretty sure that "PARAMETER STYLE GENERAL" means that each
> > > > > parameter is passed "by reference", which is the usual convention
> > > when
> > >
> > > > > CALLing an external *PGM in OS/400. That is to say, since this is
> an
> > > > > "external" UDF, you can pass parameters by reference, but not by
> > > value.
> > >
> > > > > Does that help?
> > > > >
> > > > > Mark S. Waterbury
> > > > >
> > > > >    >   On 7/30/2010 4:30 PM, MattLavinder@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> wrote:
> > > > > > > Not sure why you feel this would require you to "always change
> the
> > > > > > > prototype."  Seems to me (what works for me is) that for UDF and
> > > > > stored
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > > procedures, my prototypes say CONST instead of VALUE.  What
> > > problem
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > does
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > > this create for you?
> > > > > > Basically I was asking, "Am I doing this wrong or is this the
> only
> > > > > >
> > > > > way to
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > fix it?"  It's not difficult, but if I was defining the UDF
> > > > > incorrectly,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > correcting that definition would be a simpler solution.