RE: Hyphenated Op-Codes

[Scott Klement <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Larry,

On Tue, 7 Jun 2005, Larry Ducie wrote:
> In fact I'd go further, and abandon all new opcodes. I'd prefer it to be
> implemented as a BIF:
>
> %evalCorr(myFirstDS:mySecondDS);
The only problem I have with that idea is that it's not a function.  That 
is, it doesn't return a value!  All other BIFs return something, and 
therefore they make sense to use in an expression.
For example:

     MyString = 'The number is ' + %char(Number);

However, that doesn't seem to be the case with EVAL-CORR. Since EVAL-CORR 
doesn't return anything, it would not make any sense in an expression.
The following statement makes absolutely no sense:

     MyString = 'blah ' + %evalCorr(FirstDS: SecondDS);

Since BIFs all work in an expression, how would you call %evalCorr() if it 
didn't return anything?  You couldn't use it in an EVAL statement, since 
there'd be no way to assign it to a variable.  You couldn't use it 
anywhere else you had an expression, either.
So, I guess, you're suggesting that CALLP be extended to support BIFs.  In 
which case, %evalCorr would be the *only* BIF to be callable through this 
interface.
Seems to me that having an opcode like EVAL-CORR (although I despise that 
name as well!!!) would be a lot more consistent with the rest of the 
language than making it a BIF.  Making it a BIF makes no sense at all.
Instead, just come up with a decent opcode name.