Re: Calling similiar (overloaded) procedure that has *nopass *omit in the parameter

On 3/9/2011 1:27 PM, Dennis wrote:

I didn't se Paul questioning Barbara's knowledge/expertise. (Maybe
I missed that.) I _did_ see him ask a valid question about where
this may be documented.

But... Barbara is the person who writes that documentation. If she says it's true, it's every bit as authoritative as if it's in the documentation itself. What am I missing?

If the book and Barbara disagree (they don't, but hypothetically...) who would you believe? I'd surely believe Barbara.

One could argue, I suppose that we should 'just know,' but I, for
one, would disagree in this case since rules have changed to a
point.

Changed? They haven't changed to my knowledge in 30+ years. And I didn't say he should "just know", I said that he should take Barbara's word for it.

But, whatever... let's look at The One True Book:
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/iseries/v5r4/topic/books_web/c0925086370.htm#HDRDOPTNS

In the section about the OPTIONS(*NOPASS) keyword, it says:
"If the unpassed parameter is accessed in the called program or procedure, unpredictable results will occur."

Hmmm... that seems pretty clear to me.