Re: Static Variables in a subprocedure

[Barbara Morris <bmorris@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Joe Pluta wrote:
>  
> ... But if you're not, then changing the number of 
> parms is as good a way to communicate as any.  If you normally DO pass 
> parameters, then DON'T pass any to signal a initialization.  If you 
> normally DON'T pass any parameters, then DO pass one to signal 
> initialization.

A problem with this technique is that you have to make all the 
parameters *NOPASS.  There's a way to get around it: Create a second 
prototype for the procedure with the same EXTPROC, but no parameters; 
call it something like myproc_reset.  Then when you want the procedure 
to reset itself, call myproc_reset() instead of myproc(parms).

I'm of at least two minds about the relative goodness of the two 
techniques, but the "lying to the compiler" aspect of having two 
prototypes for a procedure seems less likely to cause maintenance 
problems that having all the parameters for the normal call be 
options(*nopass).