Re: Weird auto-complete thing

["Brian Parkins" <goodprophet.bp@xxxxxxxxx>]

Fascinating! I can only suggest you submit a PMR, Stuart. (BTW, exactly the 
same issue arises if coded in free-format).

Brian.

-----Original Message----- 
From: Stuart Rowe
Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2017 10:51 AM
To: Rational Developer for IBM i / Websphere Development Studio Client 
forSystem i & iSeries
Subject: Re: [WDSCI-L] Weird auto-complete thing

Oh it's definitely a bug.  I messed with it a little and discovered that it
seems to happen with any parameter with more than one value specified for
the options() keyword.  Any SINGLE value is formatted properly (ie not
there) but multiple values are all there, each as an extra parameter with
extra colons and end parens for each one.  Try this example:

    d someProc        pr                  extproc( 'someProc' )
    d  parm1                         1a   const
    d  parm2                         1a   options( *omit: *varsize )
    d  parm3                         1a   options( *nopass: *omit )
    d  parm4                         1a   options( *nopass: *varsize )
    d  parm5                         1a   options( *varsize )
    d  parm6                         1a   options( *nopass )
    d  parm7                         1a   options( *omit )
    d  parm8                          *   value options( *string: *trim )

and you get

      someProc(::*varsize)::*nopass)::*varsize):::::*trim))


And anyway if you think about things other than RPG, it DOES make complete
sense to use ( *omit: *nopass ) if you are planning on calling it from a C
program.  *NOPASS is great from within RPG I suppose, but does not work
when calling the routine from a C module using a procedure pointer because
the "operational descriptors" are not available (the ILE environment is not
all that integrated after all).  *OMIT is better in that case as you can
pass a NULL easily from C and it appears "omitted" to RPG.

Stu




On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Brian Parkins <goodprophet.bp@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> -----Original Message----- From: Stuart Rowe
>
> When I ctrl-space for a procedure, and I pick the one I want and press
> Enter, a sort of "template" or "guide" is emplaced into my source code 
> with
> the colons to indicate the parameter separation.  Keen!
>
> The weird thing is when the procedure has *NOPASS or *OMIT parms, the
> emplaced "template" looks really bizarre.  Here's a prototype:
>
>     d abumAppendField...
>     d                 pr              n   extproc(
>     d                                       *cnowiden:
>     d                                       'abumAppendField'
>     d                                       )
>     d  abumField                          likeds( abumField_t )
>     d                                       const
>     d                                       options( *varsize )
>     d  abumMsg                            likeds( abumMsg_t )
>     d                                       options( *varsize )
>     d  maxlen                             like( int_t )
>     d                                       const
>     d                                       options( *omit: *nopass )
>
> When I ctrl-space and highlight the function and press Enter, I get this:
>
>     abumAppendField(:::*nopass));
>
> Not sure what good the *nopass does at this juncture -- but when there are
> like 10 of them, it looks REALLY bizarre escpecially when it has to wrap
> the line because it got too long due to all the *nopass stuck in there.
>
> Is this on purpose?  What is it supposed to indicate to me as part of a
> function call?  I like it in the prototype picture I get with ctrl-space,
> but it seems kind of senseless to emplace it into the source like that.
> -----------------------------
> Stuart, maybe LPEX is getting "confused" by the definition of the last
> parameter (MAXLEN) in the list. Although OPTIONS(*OMIT:*NOPASS) is
> perfectly legal, it doesn't make complete sense to have _both_ values
> specified for the _last_ parameter. Try removing one of the values, (e.g.
> *OMIT) and I think you'll find CTL+SPACE will work a little better.  (I
> have to agree that this appears to be a "bug" in the Content Assist
> function.)
>
> Brian.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/wdsci-l
> or email: WDSCI-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/wdsci-l.
> --
> 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,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/wdsci-l
> or email: WDSCI-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/wdsci-l.