Re: Separate buisness and display logic question

[Albert York <alfromme@xxxxxxxxx>]

Okay, I give up.

In all honesty I don't use the LDA for new development either. It just
seemed that in the case presented it would be a reaonable choice since
the OP wanted access to data that was not being returned to his
program and seemed reluctant to change the parameters.

Albert


On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:30 PM,  <rob@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In the "way back" machine part of the problems I had with LDA included,
> but were not limited to:
> - combining two disparate vendor solutions.
> - actually running out of lda positions
> - not finding any current use of position x so I started using it.  Then
> putting on vendor upgrade and trying to determine all the places where I
> used that position, which the vendor now uses.
>
> Then again, I am not a big fan of using one big data structure parameter
> for calling programs either.
> .
> .
> .
> or job switches
> .
> .
> .
> just to fan some flames and hijack a thread :-)
>
>
> Rob Berendt
> --
> Group Dekko
> Dept 1600
> Mail to:  2505 Dekko Drive
>          Garrett, IN 46738
> Ship to:  Dock 108
>          6928N 400E
>          Kendallville, IN 46755
> http://www.dekko.com
>
> --
> 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.