On 6/2/2014 12:31 PM, Kurt Anderson wrote:
For constants we go with the convention of all caps, which I think isstandard in other languages.
I like this convention also.
We use $ in front of exported procedure names. The fight against using$ @ # seems to be in regard to taking the code global. This makes sense
for vendors. It makes sense for international shops. Maybe I'm being
short-sighted in not seeing our code going global?
I used to feel this way until my very stodgy, boring wholesale paper
company was bought out by an international organisation. Surprise!
Thing is, I find our naming of procedures to be incredibly helpful. Isuppose we could instead have them all prefixed as E_ and it would be
A good naming convention can make one's job easy or difficult.
My comment here isn't about RDi but rather, RPG. We don't have
namespaces, so it can be very frustrating to create a very useful
service program with a subprocedure name like 'read' only to find out in
a few years that someone else had the same idea (like CGIDEV2). And now
there's a name collision :-( I've started to name my subprocedures by
the name of the service program followed by the subprocedure name, so
instead of 'getName' I have 'customer_getName' and 'vendor_getName' and
Every shop I've been at has used #, though I do prefer "Number" writtenout personally.
I've seen a lot of that, too, as well as things like PAY$ to denote a
This is the Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio
Client for System i & iSeries (WDSCI-L) mailing list
To post a message email: WDSCI-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
or email: WDSCI-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.