×
The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.
I see what y'all are doing with the second approach - it just reads
funny to me. It actually slows me down, especially since the other way
is more what our shop does across the board.
But this is right up there with the bracket preferences in C and Java, I
suppose. Shall we all kneel down and pray? Yes, this is, IMO, a highly
religious argument!!
BTW, this all gets strange and moot when you start using expressions for
parameters, not variables. Feels like the kind of thing where procedures
are based on the trivial cases. I mention it, because it feels like what
I ran into, looking for ways to emulate SETLL with SQL - all the
examples are single-column keys - hey, that's a no-brainer - now try it
with 3 columns in the key - with 6! None of the answers available on the
'Net are any help for the general case. BTW, I do know how, with the
help of another developer at work.
Ducking and running!
Vern
On 4/5/2011 6:21 PM, Mark S. Waterbury wrote:
(That did not line up quite right ...)
I used to format it like this:
usefulProcedure ( itemID :
itemName :
itemCode :
itemQty );
Now, I often format it like this:
usefulProcedure ( itemID
: itemName
: itemCode
: itemQty
);
Mark
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact
[javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.