Re: Why is there a "name" on the procedure interface?

The only case where I have ever thought it was of some use is in shops that mandate that the comments describing the procedure come between the dcl-proc and the dcl-pi. IN those circumstances there can quite a long way from one to the other. Not something I'd ever do but that's the only use case I can think of.


Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com

On Apr 26, 2019, at 6:51 PM, Stuart Rowe <rowestu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I always wondered why there is a "name" on a procedure interface. I have
never seen an example where *n was not sufficient as the name. I don't
often code a procedure interface without an immediately preceding dcl-proc
(with the name on it) so I haven't seen everything. I see an example in
the ILE RPG Reference using a procedure interface for a program without a
prototype but I never do that (because I prototype everything). Still, *N
for the name.

Can anyone show an example of where a non-*N name is absolutely necessary
(and meaningful)?

I half-way thought it might be to support several procedure interfaces,
each with a different name and different parms, sort of like function
overloading, but no, only one is allowed and it MUST have the same name as
the procedure that contains it, so what's the point of the name?
--
This is the RPG programming on IBM i (RPG400-L) mailing list
To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at https://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related questions.

Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate link: https://amazon.midrange.com