|
August Fassler wrote: > > I've only recently begun to play with service programs and procedures, > etc... I have noticed that many sources of information regarding > prototypes appear to strongly recommend using copy source rather than > copying the prototype directly into your program. This raises an > interesting issue for me. We have all but said never, ever use copy > source. This is due to the fact that you can't scan for its contents > within a program and that you can't see its contents while programming. > August, whatever annoyance there might be from not having the prototype in the same source member, it can't be as bad as coding the same prototype in more than one source member. That way lies madness. If you miss a change in just one source file will be back in the bad old days of mismatched parameters. (You still have to recompile all the modules that use the changed prototype, assuming you change it in an non-upward-compatible way, but that's not as bad as editing all the modules.) As well as the outline view showing the prototype, you can also use code completion (ctrl-space) within your code to get information about a prototype. By the way, I don't think you should put prototypes for local (non-exported) procedures in /copy files.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 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.