Re: Is this the simplest way to define corresponding arrays in D-specs

[Rory Hewitt <rory.hewitt@xxxxxxxxx>]

Alan,

Well if you're defining the arrays in the D-specs, then by definition, they
can be defined inside a procedure.

Rory


On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Alan Campin <alan0307d@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I think that all this ignores at little thing call Encapsulation. If you
> are still writing RPG III and using subroutines and all your data is global
> whether you use compile time arrays is immaterial. Everything is global
> anyway but if you are writing procedures and modern program, putting this
> kind of thing in a compile time array makes it global and every procedure
> can see and act on it. What you want is to have something like this
> encapsulated inside a procedure or maybe better yet in a procedure in a
> service program. The caller should just ask what the value related with
> this value. How the procedure does it should be hidden. If you are using a
> copy book, then probably without a doubt you are looking at service
> program. ILE thinking vs RPG III thinking.
>
> All of this points to the fact that we need better mechanisms for declaring
> arrays inside procedures.
>
> OK, now really duck and cover.