Re: 7.1 and RPG prototypes -- RPG400-L

× 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.

On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 10:52 AM, Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

While a terrific change for cases where procedures are used as building blocks within a program, this relaxation has caused a problem (as discussed earlier in the thread) because there were actually _two_ reasons for using prototypes. The first was to validate the call - the second (in the source that defined the procedure) was to validate that the prototype accurately reflected the procedure interface. With the relaxation in the rules it is no longer compulsory to include the prototype in the defining source and that can lead to errors when some sloppy programmer changes the prototype and does not change the procedure itself.

I'm afraid I (not OP) still don't understand. Why can't the procedure
interface ***BE*** the procedure prototype (in the context of the
source where the procedure is defined). I fail to see how it would
EVER be conceptually necessary to write the same code twice in the
same source.

John Y.

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 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.