Re: Prototypes in Module Source

[Scott Klement <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bruce Guetzkow wrote:
> Needless to say I learned a lot in those 10 minutes (namely, last program to
> compile wins!).  That got me thinking (which is no small task).  IMHO, IBM
> should have named source files based on the object type being created in
> order to eliminate the likelihood of name conflicts such as I had come
> across in my TEST example above. 

Hmmm...  so why not have QPGMSRC and QSRVPGMSRC?

For that matter, why not have PGMSRC and SRVPGMSRC?  Why begin them with 
the letter Q?  (Just because IBM did?)

Regarding QCPYSRC..   I can see the need to have copy books that have 
the same name, but are in different languages.  For example, if I create 
a service program named 'ORDER', I might want to have a copy book named 
ORDER for RPG programs and another one named ORDER for C programs. 
They'd both call the same underlying service programs, but the syntax 
for the prototypes, structures, etc, is different in C than it is in 
RPG... so I'd want two copy books with the same name.  And it's not a 
conflict...    So I guess in that case, I'd rather have RPGCPYSRC and 
CCPYSRC...

Just trying to take your ideas and add a little bit to them...