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

[Rory Hewitt <rory.hewitt@xxxxxxxxx>]

Vern,

You may have been joking, but actually, I don't think that works - the
compilation stuff for CTDATA arrays doesn't like any other copybook stuff
in there - for instance, if the copybook include a /ENDIF after the actual
CTDATA stuff at the bottom of the source, it complains that there are too
many entries...

Rory


On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Vern Hamberg <vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> You could use a copy book by having conditional statements and defines for
> stuff at the top and stuff at the bottom!!
>
> Now THAT's being a modern programmer!
>
> R&D (running, etc.)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> Trevor, Perhaps it's because he wants to put it in a copybook?
>
> Jon, frankly, I'm not sure why you consider any of the methods discussed
> earlier any 'better' than Michael's compile-time array - they *all* involve
> hard-coding data into the program source, in one way or another. Michael's
> method is certainly the easiest where one is talking about longer strings
> of data (which *can* be specified in the D-specs, but it's ugly). Plus, at
> least with a compile-time array, the data strings are all in one place, at
> the bottom of the source, rather than dotted about the D-specs or (gasp!)
> hidden in a separate copybook (OK, that was *my* idea :))
>
> Rory