Re: 7.1 and RPG prototypes

<snip>
What the compiler "sees" is effectively a single source - Yes. And I would be OK with a rule that says you MUST use /COPY (/INCLUDE) for prototypes. That does at least help to guarantee that there is only one place where they are coded.
</snip>

How would the rule work? Just because a /COPY exists in the using routine that contains the prototypes doesn't mean it's the same /COPY used to compile the used routine.

<snip>
What I don't understand is how you propose that the _using_ routine be informed of the interface requirements. If not via a prototype (and accepting that a system wide facility has too high a cost and too many issues) then how do you propose it could work?
</snip>

When I first started using procedures way back when, it was all within the same program, so it made sense that the compiler could simply check the PI specs. Then when I started using service programs, my first thought was that the compiled service program could have the PI specs available for the using routine to check. But that has the same problems as a /COPY -- if you're compiling in a development environment, the service program there may be different from the production environment's version, and boom! you're trying to figure out a mis-matched parameter issue.

-- *Peter Dow*

/Dow Software Services, Inc. 909 793-9050 petercdow@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:petercdow@xxxxxxxxx> pdow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:pdow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> /